| 1 |
On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 11:02:41PM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Both p4 and BK can export to open-source formats, like CVS. The fact |
| 3 |
> > that some kernel developers (like linus) use bk, and other developers |
| 4 |
> > don't have to, suggests that Gentoo could do the same thing. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Does the kernel have a social contract ? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I'm not sure how this is relevant - my point is that if BK disappeared |
| 9 |
tomorrow, no source would be lost, and the kernel source (the "product") |
| 10 |
wouldn't have to be changed. Contrast that with, for example, if RedHat |
| 11 |
built its packages with ICC - if ICC was to disappear tomorrow, RedHat |
| 12 |
would certainly have to change their packages next time they rebuilt - |
| 13 |
thus, they would have been dependent on it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Personally, I think the social contract is desperately ambiguous, and |
| 16 |
I'd like to see "depend upon" changed to "use", but I don't think that |
| 17 |
(as it stands) the kernel developers using BK but exporting CVS is |
| 18 |
contrary to it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If I write ebuilds with TextPad, is that a breach of the SC? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives