move to bitkeeper?

Clark Rawlins clark at
Mon Jun 30 15:00:01 CEST 2003

The real problem with Larry's policy is that if you work on 
any other SCM code free or not you must buy the full version
of the tools.  That would lock out some of us who have worked
on subversion/cvs/etc who want to work on LinuxBIOS.

Before making the jump to bitkeeper a real consideration of the
alternitives should be considered.

One that hasn't come up yet is subversion and/or

On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 12:53:58PM -0600, ron minnich wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Peter Busser wrote:
> > The most heard objection against bitkeeper is that it is not free software.
> yeah, but that's actually ok by me. It's good software, and Larry's source 
> policy is actually very reasonable.
> Plus he has a viable business, which means that they will probably be 
> there in a few years.
> ron
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxbios mailing list
> Linuxbios at

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the
second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become
the legalized version of the first."
     -- Thomas Jefferson
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the coreboot mailing list