BitKeeper licence critic

Joerg Schilling schilling at
Mon Mar 18 14:38:39 UTC 2002

>From: Simo Sorce <idra at>

>> >You don't understand that you can't force volunteers to do
>> >something. If you want to see something, you've to do it yourself.
>> You don't understand that it does not make sense to to it yourself because
>> the maintainers will not use your patches!

>You ARE wrong!
>I personally applied many patches to samba from others!

Then you are a much better maintainer than the ones I have been in contact

>> I started to do this once with Linux and the /dev/sg* driver and I failed
>> miserably because Alan Cox decided not to use my enhanced driver.

>Probably because it was poorely coded from Alan point of view, they are
>very selective and you took the worst project on the world (from this
>point of view) to make patches against.

Sorry, but my patch was definitely better than the original code and in contrary
to the typical Linux behavior planned for forward AND Backward compatibility.

The reason that Alan did not use my patch was that somebody else did work on 
things that Alan believed that it would be needed although it was a lower
priority from a SCSI user.

>hmm I think you are wrong again here, my experience with samba tell me
>so. We use GNU make and I see no multi platform problems (take a look to
> to see how many different platfroms works ok!
>They are not all the platforms samba runs on, but only the platforms we
>have currently available in the build farm)

Did you ever have a closer look at my makefile system?

It is really bad that people critisize it but do not even read the basic 

>He mean that your inclusion features are not included in GNU make
>because nobody need them, and you do not want to contribute code to make
>GNU make better.

Wrong: I need them,

>I do not want to say that GNU make is very good or that you should not
>use smake, if you are ok with smake I'm too, it's your choice, you are
>the developer, but generally in free software world, if you want to see
>a feature added to a program (GNU make) you either make a patch your
>self or contact the mainteiner and convince him it is a needed feature
>so that he can add it by itself. If you do not take either ways, please
>at least do not shout on other people work, you already said "code do
>not speak" (about the Hurd), I would like to say the same to you.

Again: Why should I make a patch to GNU make when there is my smake?

>> >Sorry, I don't have much knowledge about companies and software who
>> >only like to restric me. Solaris might be free beer then, who cares.
>> Well the authors of GDB restrict me because it is the only debugger available 
>> on Linux and because I cannot do the things I expect a debugger to do.

>You have a vrey strange idea of restriction and freedom IMO !

Other people in thie mailing list too...

>Work with people to improve GDB! If you do not care, please do not
>bother us telling to use proprietary debbugers, we will not do so!

Again: I don't have the time to do this because I work on my programs.
If those people would ask me for help, I could give them how to improve GDB
but I definitely don't have the time to do it myself. If GDB will become
usable I will be happy, but meanwhile I use a better platfor: Solaris.


 EMail:joerg at (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at		(uni)  If you don't have iso-8859-1
       schilling at		(work) chars I am J"org Schilling
 FOKUS at CeBIT Hall 11, A14 - BerliOS at CeBIT Hall 11 D11 (Future Market)
 Meet me at CeBIT in Hall 11 D11 on the BerliOS booth -

More information about the Discussion mailing list