Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | David Lang <> | Date | Sat, 15 Feb 2003 13:31:16 -0800 (PST) | Subject | Re: openbkweb-0.0 |
| |
Andrea, since the on-disk format for bitkeeper is supposed to be SCCS would it be good enough for you to be able to get a copy of this? what mechanism would you prefer to use to get updates (rsync, FTP, HTTP, etc)
David Lang
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 17:18:21 +0100 > From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> > To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> > Cc: Thomas Molina <tmolina@cox.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, > Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> > Subject: Re: openbkweb-0.0 > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 12:39:51AM +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > Imagine if all your friends started talking a different language, > > called Binglish say. You'd want to talk to them in that language so > > you could socialise and work with them. Now if they told you you must > > sign a contract and join a private society, or pay significant cash, > > otherwise you couldn't talk the language? If it were a few people > > you'd ignore them, but if it seemed like all the really powerful > > people who affect your life would just ignore you unless you talked > > it, you'd be pissed off. You'd feel the playing field had become > > unlevel and needed correction. You'd be tempted to either (1) cave in > > and pay or join the private society, (2) learn the language and > > use it anyway. > > nice comparison. > > However my short term concern is not to speak Binglish but just to > translate from Binglish to English. We need access to the data with an > open protocol and to backup the data in a open format. so we can use it > too. And Larry is now going to provide the data in the open, IMHO only > if that didn't happen we had to research into the possibility of legally > reverse enegeneering the bitkeeper protocol. the fact he is now > providing the data out in the open avoids us to waste time. > > After we can reach the data we can use any version control system we > want to manage it, I'm going to write MORE STUPID scripts to do that. > I'm been told of several giga archives with dozen thousand revisions > under subversion for istance (I know Al Viro blamed subversion code but > if the design it's good it may be a good start). subversion may not > have all the features of bitkeeper but we can certainly add them over > time, the only thing it matters to me is that we get rid of being forced > to use a proprietary protocol to fetch the data. > > The kernel CVS in more than enough for my/our needs and I thank Larry > for seeing it was necessary to allow the kernel data to be open. Now > there's no reason to argue anymore with Larry or Linus, they can choose > what they can legally use and we can choose what we can legally use and > what we find more productive in the long run. I really believe in open > protocols and open source software being superior and a necessary thing > in the long run, it's not that I advocate people to use open source > products and then I change my mind and I run proprietary apps to develop > the kernel (I don't put a smile here because clearly this isn't an > obvious thought). > > Andrea > - > 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/ > - 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |