[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] BK sync ?
From: |
Alexander Deruwe |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] BK sync ? |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:17:34 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 02:08:32PM +0100, Paul Hedderly wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 03:01:59PM +0200, Alexander Deruwe wrote:
> > I think this would require someone to buy a bk license. The free
> > license can't be used by people working on rev ctl systems.
>
> That is definately a problem... but I think the restriction is on
> people who contribute code to a completing RCS. So anyone who users
> tla but hasn't contributed code is ok to use bk still. Well at the
> moment.
This is the relevant clause:
(d) Notwithstanding any other terms in this License, this
License is not available to You if You and/or your
employer develop, produce, sell, and/or resell a
product which contains substantially similar capabil-
ities of the BitKeeper Software, or, in the reason-
able opinion of BitMover, competes with the BitKeeper
Software.
So it looks like you're right. Someone wrote bk2svn too, I wonder what
their relation to svn itself was..
Alexander
- [Gnu-arch-users] BK sync ?, Paul Hedderly, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] BK sync ?, Samium Gromoff, 2003/09/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Stig Brautaset, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Samium Gromoff, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Alexander Deruwe, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/09/17