[Linux-cluster] Subversion?

[Daniel Phillips]

Hi John,

On Monday 23 August 2004 13:07, John Cherry wrote:
> I understand that subversion is quite nice, but kernel developers
> have adopted bitkeeper (at least Linus and several of his
> maintainers). While you may not need all the distributed capabilities 
> of bitkeeper now, it is sure nice to have a tool that allows for
> non-local repositories and change set tracking outside of the main
> repository (as Kevin so clearly stated).

In my humble opinion, Bitkeeper does not have a snowball's chance in 
hell of getting established on sources.redhat.com.

> Since mainline kernel acceptance of the core services is one of the
> objectives here, I would certainly recommend that you consider
> bitkeeper for source control as well.

Just read the license.

   http://www.taniwha.org/bitkeeper.html

"Sometimes it is tempting to sacrifice our rights and freedoms for 
convinience, but we should not do so... with the increasing popularity 
of alternative licenses, it is important [to] determine whether they 
preserve the minimum acceptable amount of freedom and be responsible 
about choosing software that that meets these minimum criteria and 
advances our goals as a community"

This is 3 years old, however there has been no improvement, quite the 
contrary.

Regards,

Daniel