Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] BK->CVS (real time mirror) | Date | 11 Mar 2003 20:39:19 -0800 |
| |
Followup to: <20030312034330.GA9324@work.bitmover.com> By author: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > If all of this sounds nice, it is. It was a lot of work for us to do > this and you might be wondering why we bothered. Well, for a couple of > reasons. First of all, it was only recently that I realized that because > BK is not free software some people won't run BK to get data out of BK. > It may be dense on my part, but I simply did not anticipate that people > would be that extreme, it never occurred to me. We did a ton of work to > make sure anyone could get their data out of BK but you do have to run > BK to get the data. I never thought of people not being willing to run > BK to get at the data. Second, we have maintained SCCS compatible file > formats so that there would be another way to get the data out of BK. > This has held us back in terms of functionality and performance. I had > thought there was some value in the SCCS format but recent discussions > on this list have convinced me that without the changeset information > the file format doesn't have much value. >
I can only speak for myself, but I didn't mind until the license ended up having the "unless you hack on other tools" exception in it. Personally, I value my freedom to hack on whatever I want a lot more than the convenience of BK. This is a personal choice on my part and may sound "extreme" to you, and other people have made other tradeoffs, but for me freedom was the reason I started hacking Linux instead of becoming a Win32 geek.
Having this capability available will certainly make life better for everyone involved. Besides, "we won't hold your data hostage" is actually a pretty nice selling argument.
> > Our goal is to provide the data in a way that you can get at it without > being dependent on us or BK in any way. As soon as we have this > debugged, I'd like to move the CVS repositories to kernel.org (if I can > get HPA to agree) and then you'll have the revision history and can live > without the fear of the "don't piss Larry off license". Quite frankly, > we don't like the current situation any better than many of you, so if > this addresses your concerns that will take some pressure off of us. >
I'm sure we can work something out. However, at the moment zeus.kernel.org, our main server with lots and lots of bandwidth, is starting to run into its limits, so I can't promise *when* that will happen. Just putting in another server
-hpa -- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64 - 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) |