From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Axel Thimm Subject: Re: An offer to host autofs.org Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 14:25:36 +0200 Sender: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040504122536.GK5041@neu.nirvana> References: <20040504010928.GL14889@sun.com> <20040503175506.GA14889@sun.com> <20040504003214.GA31852@neu.nirvana> <20040504010928.GL14889@sun.com> Reply-To: autofs mailing list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============41971043130439734==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040504010928.GL14889@sun.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org To: autofs mailing list --===============41971043130439734== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ibvzjYYg+QDzMCy1" Content-Disposition: inline --ibvzjYYg+QDzMCy1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 06:09:28PM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote: > On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 09:10:27AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > > On Tue, 4 May 2004, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > - No subversion (yet?) > >=20 > > I've checked out subversion. > >=20 > > It's more than capable of dealing with the our couple of simple autofs= =20 > > projects but could be just what's needed by other autofs contributors. >=20 > Seeing as autofs is open, what's wrong with BK? BK rockssssss But BK is not open ;) I could also setup BK instead of subversion, I'd leave that to the core developers' taste & decision. On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 06:21:20PM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote: > why one app is better than another is the general issues > - and the users should decide and/or even better > if the two systems can co-exists > ( eg sourceforge + sf.net + yet-another-hosting I wouldn't fragment autofs (or any other project) across too many locations w/o a good reason (the reasons are usually that you don't get the services you need at the location you currently reside, for example you need a different SCM). > - only major issue is license terms and use of otehr peoples > machines and connectivity and datacenters > (the marketing/ceo/cfo/laywers are starting to get into the picture I probably forgot to note that the hosting offer is not coming from a commercial company, but the physics department of a university in Berlin (Freie Universit=E4t Berlin). I haven't see lawyers or marketing folks other that wanna-become students on their way to lunch ;) There is also nobody in my vicinity including me making money out of autofs. Autofs just makes lives of local system adminstrators under Linux nicer, which I cannot enumerate in Dollars or Euros. In return we offer to make development of autofs nicer. :) --=20 Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net --ibvzjYYg+QDzMCy1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAl4vAQBVS1GOamfERAoJmAJ9q7r0y2KX4rb4dP6LM0LHcZLZK8QCgg7Ud 9aplFgqsscBDooYTei9fRrc= =lTfp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ibvzjYYg+QDzMCy1-- --===============41971043130439734== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list autofs@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs --===============41971043130439734==--