BitKeeper licence critic / Indirect locking to a non-free tool
M E Leypold @ labnet
leypold at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de
Sat Mar 9 20:01:00 UTC 2002
Jeroen Dekkers writes:
> And what if Linus likes BK and just doesn't release prepatches anymore
> and just refers to the BK repository?
If this ever happens and if it becomes a real problem for more than
1 competent developer, the Linux development will fork. As it always
happened with *real* free software.
>
> > 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...
To the previous poster: I'd strongly advice not to use non-free
development software to do some real free work. That creates
dependencies, which will get you sooner or later, but I also would
vote for respecting other peoples decisions here.
To explain: If I see a project X using a non-free tool T and I would
like to fix, maintain or extend X myself (even if only internally),
and would discover I needed T for that, I would avoid to rely on X
(that is: depend on it), since I'd have an indirect lock into the tool
T. If the authors of X don't see that as a problem + it doesn't damage
the popularity of their project, than everything is Ok for them
(though I -- presonally -- would still try to avoid the project).
>
> I go against all free software developers wanting to use
> sourceforgetit already, saying that savannah is really a better
Certainly. But you can't force people, only convince them. Your
not-so-diplomatic approach isn't working too well presently, since it
isn't enough to be RIGHT. You're talking to people who insist on their
freedom, remember? :-)
> 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.
Would have been better to give a non-dogmatic reasoning for that. I
just tried, hope that is understandable.
>
> > 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.
And it's also badd to change arguments midflight.
Regards -- Markus
More information about the Discussion
mailing list