[linux-elitists] Fwd: Bitkeeper outragem, old and new
Sun Oct 13 18:26:14 PDT 2002
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 06:02:28PM -0700, David L. Sifry wrote:
> BTW, I have doubts about the authenticity of that message - RMS would
> never send out a message, let alone a missive like this one, while
> referring to the operating system as "Linux". He'd call it
This was addressed.
> > The new restrictions on Bitkeeper, saying that people who contribute
> > to CVS or Subversion and even companies that distribute them cannot
> > even run Bitkeeper, have sparked outrage. While these specific
> > restrictions are new, their spirit fits perfectly with the previous
> > Bitkeeper license.
But this is bullshit. They can use bk to write cvs or subversion, they
just have to pay for it.
In other words, you can't use bk for free to write a bk replacement.
It's a bad PR move from BM, but honestly, it doesn't shock me that
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems & security ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | Finger email@example.com for PGP key
More information about the linux-elitists