Hi, Branden Robinson: > In short, circumstances outside your knowledge and beyond your control > can place you in violation of the BitKeeper gratis license. I would be Lary McVoy clarified that on the kernel list. I'm not going to repeat what he said -- read the list archive. > I simply want my fellow developers to understand the risk they undertake > when they use BitKeeper, assuming the license is enforceable as written. > ... assuming that anybody (i.e. the owners of Bitkeeper, i.e. Larry McVoy who says he still owns >50% of his company) would want to enforce this license against people who, in good faith, use Bitkeeper to work on free software. I simply cannot imagine him doing that. BK gets a lot of free good publicity because it's used for the kernel; if he did, that would instantly turn into a lot of very bad publicity, and a bunch of people who would use their experience with BK usage to work on improving subversion or arch or ... -- Matthias Urlichs | noris network AG | http://smurf.noris.de/
Attachment:
pgpfnbPJe16k6.pgp
Description: PGP signature