Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 15 Feb 2003 14:04:08 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: openbkweb-0.0 |
| |
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:56:02PM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > Larry, I already said this and maybe you missed it ( or maybe not ). > > What about having a GPLed ( or whatever other license ), read-only BK > > available for the ones that simply need to fetch stuff from BK > > repositories ? You don't have to maintain another repository for > > compatibility, and also you enforce BK usage. > > We're not going to expose the network protocol. For two reasons: > - it works really well (we're proud of this) > - it is really ugly (we're not proud of this :) > > A read only client isn't read only, it has to be read/write to update the > out of date copy.
I was meaning read-only for the repository point of view. Ok, you don't need to give away the protocol. You don't even have to give away source code. Why don't you choose a binary license that removes things that ppl are against of here ?
- Davide
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |