Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree

Richard Gooch
2002-04-21T16:27:33Z

Daniel Phillips writes:
> On Saturday 20 April 2002 18:13, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > Daniel,
> >
> > This is not documentation for bitkeeper but how to use bitkeeper
> > effectively for kernel development. It happens to be DAMN USEFULL
> > documentation at that for anyone wanting to use bitkeeper for kernel
> > development so IMO it fully belongs in the kernel. Just like the
> > SubmittingPatches document does, too. Or are you going to remove that as well?
>
> By that logic, we should also include the lkml FAQ in the kernel
> tree. Should we?

No. A pointer to the lkml FAQ is sufficient.

Regards,

Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au
Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca