Re: [PATCH] Remove Bitkeeper documentation from Linux tree

Roman Zippel
2002-04-20T17:05:49Z

Hi,

David Lang wrote:

> If they start to be tools that are used to submit changes to the kernel
> then yes they should be included.

"start"? People used other source management system already before bk.

> remember that the reason for the bitkeeper documentation is to help people
> setup a tree that linux (and others) can pull from, not to help people
> setup their own tree just for them to hack on.

The problem is that this suggest, bk would be the choice for kernel
development or even usage. They are lots of kernel projects, which use
cvs, but noone before considered submitting extensive cvs documentation
into the kernel.

bye, Roman