> You're missing the point. I am not against the CVS->BK gateway. I'm all
> for it. But it's kind of sour given that he now wants to change the disk
> format of the repo to make it harder to get the data from it.
>
> If all he announced was "you now have a CVS->BK repo", I wouldn't be
> complaining, I'd be patting him on the back.
As long as we continue to get all the data in an open format, I'm
not sure this really matters, personally. If there's some data loss,
let's focus on that issue ... but it seems there isn't at the moment.
I'd rather we *didn't* go trying to clone BK and make it file-format
compatible underneath ... that seems more incendiary than useful.
Cloning other products is always a loosing game, the best you can do
is catch them. Personally, I'd prefer we spent the effort making a
usable simple SCM that 95% of us can use that does merges and stuff,
and not bother trying to follow someone else in file format.
Of course, I'm in no position to dictate to others what they should
implement, do what you like ... just my personal opinion. But there's
always the possiblity we can make something that fits kernel development
*better*, rather than playing catchup to BK all the time ;-)
M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 15 2003 - 22:00:33 EST