[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] BK sync ?
From: |
Karel Gardas |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] BK sync ? |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:46:41 +0200 (CEST) |
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Alexander Deruwe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 03:29:14PM +0200, Karel Gardas wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Alexander Deruwe wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > I'm afraid that by "develop" there is also mean developing any addition to
> > tla. So IMHO any development of direct (vide below) bk2arch is prohibited.
>
> Hrm, yeah, and bk2arch would almost certainly be classed as 'competing
> product'.
Very competing - I would even say that one of the biggest competitor are
"migration tools" to competitor technology :-)
Cheers,
Karel
--
Karel Gardas address@hidden
ObjectSecurity Ltd. http://www.objectsecurity.com
- [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
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Tom Lord, 2003/09/18
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Karel Gardas, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: BK sync ?, Bruce Stephens, 2003/09/17