Hi, On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Larry McVoy wrote:
Larry, it's interesting how you try to distract from the main problem (which you don't mention with a single word) and instead continues to badmouth me. Let's take a look. > Short version: let's violate a license. Wrong, if I wanted to violate the license, I could have done so already and I certainly wouldn't make such a fuss about it. To remind you the main problem was and is still, that the kernel history is locked into bk. At this point I'm not really sure, whether all bk user realize this, as you constantly try to distract them with random accusation against my person. > Our position is clear: we are trying to do the right thing for Linux, That's of course a noble goal, but what if such help is attached to conditions? Then it might of course happen that such help is rejected, the question is only where is the problem. For you it's of course clear it must be the potential receivers fault, looking critically at the conditions is out of question for you. > You know, you could change all this. Instead of complaining that we > are somehow hurting you, which virtually 100% of the readers know is > nonsense, you could be producing an alternative answer which is better. Another smoke bomb. You already made it clear, that even if I did that, I couldn't import the kernel history into it anyway. There are already possible alternatives, which should be able to store the kernel history as currently recorded in bk, but we will never know because any attempt to do so will be constructed as license violation. I skipped all the insults, which you use to further distract attention from the actual problem and instead try to descredit me personally. You must be getting quite desperate to start hitting that low. :( bye, Roman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
