[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [BK] upgrade will be needed
    On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 09:13:14PM -0500, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
    > > The way some people are reading the license the price is even higher,
    > > they think it is a forever tainted license as it stands today. I've had
    > > specific requests to clarify this part of the license.
    > >
    > > So how would you suggest that we resolve it? The protection we need is
    > > that people don't get to
    > How about just reversing it. If you work on another scm you cannot use
    > _free_ bk for 1 year after you stop.

    Hi Ed, thanks for the thought. We've discussed this idea before with
    some managers of open source developers and found that no matter which
    one we pick some people don't like it. People tend to cluster up based on
    whether they value working on $SCM more or using BK more. If they want to
    preserve the ability to move people to working on competing products then
    they would like the option you suggested. If they are more interested
    in using BK then they would prefer the other way. The people we spoke
    with were far more interested in the ability to move people onto BK when
    they needed to.

    But it's a good idea and we'd certainly be willing to flip to your way
    on a case by case basis.
    Larry McVoy lm at
    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 14:10    [W:0.039 / U:8.188 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site