Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:43:25 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Version control software (was: Patch sets to date and timing tests with Giant out of userret.) Message-ID: <20020221124325.Y65817@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20020219164406.B29698@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20020219080019.8F1673A9A@overcee.wemm.org> <00cd01c1b926$82d35bb0$ef01a8c0@davidwnt> <20020219.135131.83283562.imp@village.org> <20020219164406.B29698@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, 19 February 2002 at 16:44:06 -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 01:51:31PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: >> Bitkeeper enforces the linux devleopment model >> to a large extent, > > In what way(s)? I'd be interested in this too. I've been using Bitkeeper for, well, Linux development, but I don't see anything which locks it in to that direction. Of course, Bitkeeper isn't free either, so there's no particular reason to prefer it to p4. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020221124325.Y65817>