> Patrik Stridvall <psÉleissner.se> writes:
>
> > As a related question, perhaps we should discuss using
> > BitKeeper instead of CVS then Wine 1.0 is released.
> >
> > I suggest we continue using CVS during the beta testing,
> > while we discuss whether we should use BitKeeper
> > after Wine 1.0 is released.
>
> BitKeeper looks like a nice tool, that fixes many of the shortcomings
> of CVS. But personally I find its "your money or your privacy" license
> unacceptable, and I don't want to subject Wine developers to this kind
> of dilemma.
Which privacy? All changes to the tree is posted to wine-cvs anyway.
What is the difference?
Of course if we have several workgroups, this will happend
for each workgroup but then we probably want a mailing-list
for theses changes anyway.
The point is that we don't want any privacy of that kind
anyway. We _want_ intrested people to see all changes in
all workgroups. Why does it matter if BitKeeper see it to?
As a sidenote I can add that I don't like
"your money or your privacy" either, but
in Wine's case it is of little importance.
