Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jan 2003 06:22:14 +0000 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: Is the BitKeeper network protocol documented? |
| |
(Whoops, sorry Larry, it's appropriate to include l-k in To:).
Larry McVoy wrote: > As far as I can tell your complaint is that you can't have access to > the up to minute source view without using something which violates > your politics.
No; my complaint is that I'm not _allowed_ to use BitKeeper.
I'll use it if you say it's ok. Do you grant me permission?
Your license seems to request that I don't use it, because of other programs I work on which have nothing to do with the kernel or politics. I'm not going to enumerate them; suffice to say I think they fall under clause 3(d) of the bkl. I could be mistaken.
(It seems ironic, given that you and I share an interest - in tools to improve the software engineering process).
Thanks, -- Jamie
ps. Yes I know it's possible to pay - if I had any money.
pps. I was also letting you know you might like to update your web page, which is out of date. - 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/
| |