On Sunday 10 April 2005 11:35 pm, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 10:30:29PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: > > A while back, we had to move the gentoo kernel patches out of the Gentoo > > CVS because we realised it conflicted with the old copyright assignment > > form: I have signed an agreement saying that everything I put in gentoo > > cvs will be copyrighted to Gentoo. That obviously isn't the case for > > kernel patches that I didn't write. > > > > We moved the kernel patches into a bitkeeper repo, and they've been there > > for a while. However, this might be clashing with the social contract, > > and costless BK is going away, so its time to move again. I'd love to > > host these in a Gentoo repo, preferably SVN, but would need to get that > > agreement revoked for me and the other kernel developers. Who do I need > > to speak to? > > Thanks for bringing this up, I was going to do so this week. I can get > the cvs data out of the bk tree, if we want to move it anywhere else, so > we will not loose the history (if that's an issue.) But we need to get > moved off of bkbits.net as soon as possible,
> and the gentoo server is > not a current solution :( could you be please more specific? I mean. why isn't it a current solution? because SVN isn't right in place or because of the copyright problems still around or ...? thanks, Christian Parpart. -- Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 23:42:51 up 18 days, 12:49, 2 users, load average: 0.44, 0.69, 0.75
pgpftbMY1O8Aq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
