Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Mar 2003 10:48:02 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: Never ever use word BitKeeper if Larry does not like you |
| |
On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 09:09:15AM -0800, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > Ok, let's try again. Because honestly I'm pretty sick of this BK saga on > > lkml. It's maybe time to understand if people here is against Larry or > > against the BK license itself. It seems to me that there's the request of > > a read-only tool that is able to read BK repositories to fetch the latest > > kernel trees. I proposed before to Larry and to lkml to have Larry to > > release a read-only ( read-only here means, able only to fetch sources and > > related information ) BK binary under different licensing. Why this > > couldn't solve the problem if Larry and the anti-BK movement will find an > > agreement on the license ? Larry, is it possible to release such tool > > under a less strict license ? > > No. > > Because, in order to properly export data, you have to not understand > the BK file format, but you also have precisely follow BK's method > for creating the "weave" of changesets which produces a valid [GNU > patch / changeset / whatever]. > > Thus, even to have an open source BK export tool requires that key > BK algorithms be open sourced.
Precised that the CVS export works for this purpose, why should you need to open source algos to simply fetch sources from BK repos ? And, I was talking about a binary, not source.
- 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/
| |