BitKeeper licence critic

Fri Mar 8 21:10:51 UTC 2002

On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 09:00:27PM +0000, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 07:30:19PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > Having to install non-free software to get the latest piece of your
> > software is limiting you if you want to use that software. But at that
> > time my default OS will probably be GNU/Hurd.
> 
> You still won't have to use non-free software in order to get the latest
> piece of software, the kernel's patches are just diff output. (Or so
> I think.)

And what if Linus likes BK and just doesn't release prepatches anymore
and just refers to the BK repository?

> Going against linux people for using BK is like going against all
> free software developers that use source forge, or use vi, or use mozilla,
> or do cross development to non free OS. It's just irracional...

I go against all free software developers wanting to use
sourceforgetit already, saying that savannah is really a better
option. According to my knowledge vi (at least some implementations)
and mozilla are free.

Free software developers shouldn't use non-free software and promote
free software IMHO.

> The Linux Kernel is still Free Software, has always been and I can se no
> reason for not staying that way just because some of the developers started
> using BK...

My biggest reasons for not staying with Linux are technical.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers at jabber.org
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: jeroen at openprojects
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20020308/0243943b/attachment.sig>