![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri October 29 2004 2:45 am, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:03:42PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > > [complaints about the awful horrible evil BK2CVS tool] > > You > do not get to use BK metadata to do so either, those are also our rules. > The contents of the BK, ie the metadata is Free software, licensed under the GPL. Therefore i don't understand .. Isn't this then a violation of the GPL ? Isn't this something like M$ stating that you are the property of M$ because you are using one of their systems. Worser still ? Do you mean to say M$ owns all *.doc, *.xls files etc as an example... If so, then that is really bad .. > Free software, at least > some of it, is no more than a copy. > sarcasm ? Even the linux kernel is free software .. Isn't this is just like M$ marketing talk ? > It's my claim that I value free software even *more* than you do. Why? It's a contradiction, considering the earlier two statements. I agree to the fact that BK has made Kernel development faster, which has therefore helped. I'm not a BK user. I download the tarballs, but the statements by Mr. Larry has shaken me a bit. As per the statements by Mr. Larry, what i understood is that the BK metadata belongs to Mr. Larry legally as per the US rules and regulations. Manu > - 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||