[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: New BK License Problem?
In private email with Larry I asked him to clarify the question to the
list; he didn't want to; but he did clarify to me the following and said
I could pass it on. Here is my understanding of what he said.

It really does appear that if you happen to be employed by a rival of
Larry's then you aren't allowed to use it, even to check out free
software unless you talk to Larry first. He seems to be open to working
out exemptions/work arounds for particular organisations.

I was worried that this meant that some people didn't have access to
free software stored with bk; he pointed out that he has gone to great lengths
to make the file formats fully compatible with SCCS (which answered my
question of why something in this day and age had messages about SCCS
appearing). So it should be possible to access the software using
software other than bitkeeper.

Now while I happen to not to like the idea of a license that restricts
usage based on who you happen to work for, my main fear (of people being
unable to get to hosted software) seems to be irrelevent due to this
SCCS compatibility. So how does one use SCCS/CSSC to get the bk kernel

That is my last message on this subject.

---------------- Have a happy GNU millennium! ----------------------
/ Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux on Alpha,68K| Happy \
\ gro.gilbert @ | MIPS,x86,ARM, SPARC and HP-PA | In Hex /
\ _________________________|_____ |_______/
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.167 / U:2.900 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site