BitKeeper licence critic

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 09:17:14PM +0100, M E Leypold @ labnet wrote:
> 
> 
> Jeroen Dekkers writes:
>  > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 09:26:19PM +0000, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote:
>  > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 10:10:51PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> 
>  > Probably because they aren't needed anymore. And if Linux uses BK he
>  > could decide that BK is replacing the prepatches system.
> 
> IMHO you're confusing a release strategy (prepatches) with a tool
> (BK).

Those things are related. The prepatching system also uses tools (diff
and patch). But with a source control system you can do those things
much better and thus a repository could replace prepatches. You can
just have no development versions anymore, only a development branch
which would provide the same functionality.

>  > They do. They give the impression that they can't do everything with
>  > free software and have to use non-free software. That isn't really
> 
> Well -- ande this is actually true and usually a result of some kind
> or other of vendor lock-in. Think about PDF. My god, how I wish to get
> that replaced by something free which every windows user can read.
 
AFAIK PDF is pretty free. The only problem is that you can't easily
modify it, but it's at least better than M$ word documents.
 
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/20020315/edf3dd52/attachment.sig>