phillips at redhat.com
Sat Sep 25 14:44:27 UTC 2004
On Saturday 25 September 2004 04:30, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 10:07:22AM -0700, 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).
> Do you think, redhat will provide bk licenses for people which don't
> get a free one? I'm a subversion and svk developer and will not get
> one because of this.
Speaking with my red hat on, I do not think Red Hat will provide a
Bitkeeper license for anyone who is not a Red Hat employee. Speaking
personally, I oppose the use of any proprietary version control tool in
an open source project.
Arch and Subversion are both good enough to do the job.
More information about the Linux-cluster