On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 05:50:25PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > The existence (or non-existence) of the docs has absolutely no marketing
> > value to BK.
>
> So you have no problem with moving them to a website, leaving a url in
> SubmittingPatches?
It's not my call to make. Take it up with the people who own the tree.
Personally, I think a patch like this is more of what you need:
===== bk-kernel-howto.txt 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/Documentation/BK-usage/bk-kernel-howto.txt Fri Mar 15 09:08:54 2002
+++ edited/bk-kernel-howto.txt Mon Apr 22 09:04:26 2002
@@ -1,5 +1,9 @@
+To placate some pedantic people who feel that this document is an
+advertisement, the name of the source management system has been
+replaced with "groovy SCM".
- Doing the BK Thing, Penguin-Style
+
+ Doing the groovy SCM Thing, Penguin-Style
@@ -11,48 +15,48 @@
Due to the author's background, an operation may be described in terms
of CVS, or in terms of how that operation differs from CVS.
-This is -not- intended to be BitKeeper documentation. Always run
+This is -not- intended to be groovy SCM documentation. Always run
"bk help <command>" or in X "bk helptool <command>" for reference
documentation.
-BitKeeper Concepts
-------------------
+groovy SCM Concepts
+-------------------
etc.
-- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 23 2002 - 22:00:31 EST