From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org>
To: The Open Source Club at The Ohio State University
<opensource-admin@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, opensource@cis.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:41:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020305154147.A6211@vger.timpanogas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020305165233.A28212@fireball.zosima.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020305165233.A28212@fireball.zosima.org>; from opensource-admin@cis.ohio-state.edu on Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 04:52:34PM -0500
All hail the non-profit nazis from Ohio State. It's none of your
f_cking business what we use to develop software. I use a hardware
American Arium logic analyzer and a proprietary Linux kernel
debugger. Should people be boycotted when they use hardware
analyzers to debug hardware and software with Linux.
It's pretty clear that the alumni of Ohio State University have the
finest sinsemilla weed around, and have been smoking it. I guess
you guys will decide who we get to sleep with next, marry, and
which type of cereal we get to eat.
The motto behind open source was "freedom of choice". So much for
progress. Let's bring back slavery while we are at at. I'll move
back to the Indian reservation in New Mexico where I grew up since
freedom is going away.
How about sending me some of the killer weed you guys have been smoking.
You can pass the crack pipe around while you're at it.
:-)
Jeff
On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 04:52:34PM -0500, The Open Source Club at The Ohio State University wrote:
> Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers
>
> We, the undersigned members and officers of the Open Source Club at
> the Ohio State University, are unhappy with the advocacy of the
> proprietary[1] BitKeeper software for use in maintaining the Linux
> kernel. The Linux kernel is an important symbol of Open Source and
> Free Software for many people, and a project in which many thousands
> have participated in active development. It is fine if some kernel
> developers choose to use BitKeeper on their own machines, but
> officially endorsing proprietary software as the means of working on
> the kernel is a large step backwards for Linux, and for the Open
> Source and Free Software communities.
>
> If the core Linux maintainers begin to advocate using BitKeeper, then
> there will be strong pressure on these peripheral developers to use
> BitKeeper too, since it would likely be easier than browsing the
> web-exported changelogs or fetching the latest diff from kernel.org.
>
> Using a closed-source, proprietary source control system for the
> kernel is even worse than using other forms of proprietary software
> such as source code analysis systems, because the revision control
> metadata (version numbers, branches, changelog comments, etc.), would
> be stored in a format defined by the proprietary software. This
> metadata is really a part of Linux, because people will want to use it
> when talking about the kernel. Those who can't[2] or don't want to
> use BitKeeper are left out in the cold. One of the most important
> parts of Open Source and Free Software is that we, the community, are
> in control. But by using and advocating BitKeeper, we would lose part
> of that control.
>
> In summary, please do not advocate BitKeeper for use by the general
> community. The Linux development process seems to have worked up till
> now, and we can wait a little longer until Arch[3] or Subversion[4]
> are completed. Moreover, full-featured, completely functional free
> versioning sytems are currently available, such as PRCS[5] and CVS[6].
> We respect the kernel maintainer's freedom to use proprietary software
> for their own purposes. And we ask the kernel maintainers to respect
> the community's freedom from entrapment by proprietary software.
>
> -- The Open Source Club at The Ohio State University
> Signed by:
> Michael Benedict <zosima@zosima.org>
> Colin Walters <walters@debian.org>
> Matt Curtin <cmcurtin@interhack.net>
> Martin Jansche <jansche@ling.ohio-state.edu>
> Balbir Thomas <thomas.1037@osu.edu>
> Nicholas Hurley <hurley@cis.ohio-state.edu>
> Ryan McCormack <mccormac@cis.ohio-state.edu>
> Shaun Rowland <rowland@cis.ohio-state.edu>
>
> [1] http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/user/x/i/xiphmont/Public/critique.html
> [2] Perhaps they aren't connected to the internet regularly enough,
> for instance.
> [3] http://www.regexps.com/#arch
> [4] http://subversion.tigris.org
> [5] http://prcs.sourceforge.net
> [6] http://www.cvshome.org
>
> -
> 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/
next parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-05 22:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 121+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-05 22:41 Jeff V. Merkey [this message]
2002-03-05 21:52 ` The Open Source Club at The Ohio State University
2002-03-05 22:16 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-05 22:38 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2002-03-06 0:51 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-06 14:54 ` Kent Borg
2002-03-06 16:56 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-06 22:13 ` Pavel Machek
2002-03-07 16:17 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2002-03-07 19:54 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-07 20:15 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-07 20:38 ` yodaiken
2002-03-07 21:05 ` [opensource] " michael bernstein
2002-03-07 21:07 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-08 4:12 ` Open Source should stand on its own two legs Mark Mielke
2002-03-07 21:24 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers Richard Gooch
2002-03-07 22:44 ` Florian Weimer
2002-03-07 23:08 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of Alan Cox
2002-03-07 23:04 ` Florian Weimer
2002-03-07 21:41 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers yodaiken
2002-03-07 22:01 ` John Jasen
2002-03-07 22:17 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 23:21 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-13 2:31 ` Petro
2002-03-08 2:38 ` Rusty Russell
2002-03-07 20:50 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2002-03-07 20:53 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-07 21:23 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-07 21:42 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 21:47 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2002-03-07 20:50 ` Cort Dougan
2002-03-07 21:12 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 21:15 ` Cort Dougan
2002-03-07 22:28 ` Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by LinuxMaintainers Andrew Morton
2002-03-07 22:47 ` Cort Dougan
2002-03-07 22:56 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-15 6:45 ` kgdb for 2.4 and 2.5, now in BK Jeff Garzik
2002-03-07 21:47 ` Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers Andrew Morton
2002-03-07 21:58 ` Cort Dougan
2002-03-07 21:58 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 22:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-07 22:46 ` Florian Weimer
2002-03-07 22:42 ` Florian Weimer
2002-03-07 19:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-03-07 19:32 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-07 20:12 ` george anzinger
2002-03-07 21:37 ` kernel debuggers (was Bitkeeper Bashing) Jeff V. Merkey
2002-03-05 22:40 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers Colin Walters
2002-03-05 22:54 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement ofBitKeeper " Jeff Garzik
2002-03-05 23:11 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-03-06 0:09 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2002-03-06 2:23 ` Karl
2002-03-06 3:35 ` michael bernstein
2002-03-07 1:22 ` David Schwartz
2002-03-05 23:01 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper " Mike Fedyk
2002-03-05 23:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-03-05 23:25 ` David Lang
2002-03-06 20:46 ` Mark Mielke
2002-03-06 21:07 ` Chris Friesen
2002-03-07 2:35 ` Petro
2002-03-05 23:16 ` David Lang
2002-03-05 23:36 ` Michael Bernstein
2002-03-05 23:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-05 23:57 ` That Linux Guy
2002-03-06 1:05 ` Alexander Viro
2002-03-06 1:22 ` Dave Jones
2002-03-06 1:46 ` Shawn Starr
2002-03-06 1:50 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-03-06 1:59 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-06 2:19 ` Shawn Starr
2002-03-06 16:08 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 1:27 ` David Schwartz
2002-03-07 1:34 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 2:33 ` Petro
2002-03-07 7:06 ` Rob Turk
2002-03-06 0:02 ` Kenneth Johansson
2002-03-05 23:06 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement ofBitKeeper " Colin Walters
2002-03-05 23:19 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper " Colin Walters
2002-03-06 16:04 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-06 19:46 ` Colin Walters
2002-03-06 20:12 ` Davide Libenzi
2002-03-06 20:24 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-06 20:57 ` David S. Miller
2002-03-06 21:12 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-06 21:15 ` Cort Dougan
2002-03-06 21:25 ` Evan Powers
2002-03-05 23:58 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-06 0:11 ` [opensource] " Colin Walters
2002-03-06 6:11 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-03-06 7:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-03-06 15:58 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-07 9:15 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-03-05 22:50 ` Kilobug
2002-03-05 23:29 ` Stephen Samuel
[not found] ` <004301c1c4a6$ab218340$b0d3fea9@pcs686>
2002-03-08 1:39 ` Stephen Samuel
2002-03-08 2:25 ` Alexander Viro
2002-03-08 3:32 ` yodaiken
2002-03-08 4:35 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-03-08 7:56 ` Sean Hunter
2002-03-06 2:23 ` Karl
2002-03-06 3:47 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2002-03-06 3:40 ` [opensource] " michael bernstein
2002-03-06 5:04 ` Jeff V. Merkey
2002-03-09 16:12 ` [opensource] Re: Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeepe Kai Henningsen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-07 18:10 Petition Against Official Endorsement of BitKeeper by Linux Maintainers Nicholas Berry
2002-03-07 18:02 Jean-Luc Leger
2002-03-07 18:33 ` Cort Dougan
[not found] <20020305165233.A28212@fireball.zosima.org.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <3C8543CC.A6017F76@zip.com.au.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2002-03-06 9:40 ` Andi Kleen
2002-03-06 10:17 ` Dave Jones
2002-03-06 14:48 ` Paul P Komkoff Jr
2002-03-06 15:59 ` yodaiken
2002-03-06 13:26 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2002-03-06 14:30 ` Roman Zippel
2002-03-06 17:00 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-06 18:11 ` Roman Zippel
2002-03-07 4:27 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2002-03-07 16:51 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2002-03-07 17:26 ` Mark Mielke
2002-03-07 17:39 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-08 10:07 ` Matthias Andree
2002-03-05 22:33 rddunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020305154147.A6211@vger.timpanogas.org \
--to=jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=opensource-admin@cis.ohio-state.edu \
--cc=opensource@cis.ohio-state.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®