From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 15:01:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 15:01:18 -0400 Received: from blowme.phunnypharm.org ([65.207.35.140]:6667 "EHLO blowme.phunnypharm.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 15:01:17 -0400 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 15:06:38 -0400 From: Ben Collins To: Lars Marowsky-Bree Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: New BK License Problem? Message-ID: <20021005190638.GN585@phunnypharm.org> References: <20021004140802.E24148@work.bitmover.com> <20021005175437.GK585@phunnypharm.org> <20021005112552.A9032@work.bitmover.com> <20021005184153.GJ17492@marowsky-bree.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021005184153.GJ17492@marowsky-bree.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > free SCM (ie, working on CVS, Subversion etc); he couldn't be an effective > kernel developer today (ie, using BK) and also continue working on the other > open source project... I don't want to get the wrong point across. I don't use BK to do kernel development. I live just fine without it, and my patches get accepted just fine by Linus, Marcelo and DaveM. The Linux1394 project survives using Subversion for our repository. Now, other more serious kernel developers who have been using BK for some time, may one day find they'd like to help a competing project. They have to make a choice between the means that they develop for the linux kernel and helping a project they have become interested in. Suddenly all the kernel developers who have staked their work in BK cannot work on a "competing" product to BK, without changing their development model. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/