Re: Warning to Debian Developers regarding BitKeeper
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002 14:05, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > 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
Well he has just done that, which is why we are having this discussion.
> 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 ...
Yes, that's the situation now.
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page