From: jbradford@dial.pipex.com
Message-Id: <200210051530.g95FUiS8000588@darkstar.example.net>
Subject: Re: New BK License Problem?
To: lm@bitmover.com (Larry McVoy)
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 16:30:43 +0100 (BST)
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20021005081039.Z835@work.bitmover.com> from "Larry McVoy" at Oct 05, 2002 08:10:39 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1476
Lines: 23

> Try and think about this from our point of view.  We provide a complex
> yet useful product for free.  While doing so accomplishes our goal of
> helping the kernel community, it also puts us at far greater risk that
> someone will just reimplement the software.  Creating this software 
> was quite difficult and we are not in the business of providing a 
> roadmap to our competitors, they get to find their own way.  

That's somewhat analogous to the situation with Trolltech's QT, before it was GPLed.

> If you want to suggest license changes do so showing that you understand
> why we did what we did and show how your changes accomplish that in
> a better way.  Suggestions like "you guys are idiots, just GPL it and
> you can make money from support" just get ignored.  Suggestions which
> increase, rather than decrease, our risk also get ignored.

You could do what Trolltech originally did, before they GPLed QT, and grant free licenses to developers who are developing free software - no matter who they work for.  I.E. If they work for BigFatCompany, Inc, but work on kernel patches in their lunch break, they get to have a free Bitkeeper license, whether they use it on the work computer or their own laptop.

John.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/