Re: BitKeeper

[Brian Ristuccia <bristucc@sw.starentnetworks.com>]

On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 02:52:01AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> (crossposted to debian-legal for input on the license; please direct
> followups to -devel or -legal as appropriate)
> 
> Has anyone looked into packaging BitKeeper (www.bitkeeper.com)? 

We have a package here which we build from the various binary shars
available on Bitmover's FTP site. I can share with you if you'd like, but
it's really trivial.

> The
> license[0] is obviously non-free due to usage restrictions, but people seem
> to like it, and some of the licensing restrictions are arguably in defense
> of other kinds of freedom. 
>

Yep. It's annoying. The license (and the enforcement code in the software
itself) has a number of practical issues which make using BitKeeper very
unpleasant at times even if you pay Bitmover to disable the logging stuff. 

> I am not interested in packaging it at this
> time, but I might file an RFP unless someone knows of a reason why it can't
> be packaged for non-free.
> 
> [0] http://www.bitkeeper.com/Sales.Licensing.Source.html
> 

It's probably OK for non-free. 

-- 
Brian Ristuccia
bristucc@sw.starentnetworks.com