Messages in this thread | | | From | John Bradford <> | Subject | Re: openbkweb-0.0 | Date | Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:56:03 +0000 (GMT) |
| |
> We'd view reverse engineering the protocol as falling under the "you're > working on a competing implementation". > > The general message is that you are free to use BK but you aren't free > to use BK in any way which could hurt the business which produces BK.
I don't really see the point of spending any time trying to make a set of open source tools to access BK repositories, unless Larry decides to make the necessary protocol information available.
That time could be better spent developing a complete alternative to BK, which would benefit everybody - at the moment, practically all of the innovation in source management that I can see is coming from Bitmover. If a free alternative to BK was developed, both it's development team and BitMover could work together on ideas, and then go and implement them in their own ways.
Oh, and before anybody suggests that I develop free alternative to BK myself, I am too busy working on the Kernel Bug Database and other projects :-).
John. - 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/
| |