Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S261603AbSJFPVE>; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 11:21:04 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S261647AbSJFPVD>; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 11:21:03 -0400
Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:44233 "HELO mx2.elte.hu")
	by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id <S261603AbSJFPVD>;
	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 11:21:03 -0400
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 17:37:48 +0200 (CEST)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Reply-To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: New BK License Problem?
In-Reply-To: <20021006075300.H9032@work.bitmover.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210061722590.9108-100000@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1606
Lines: 42


On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Larry McVoy wrote:

> > this kind of sudden change in Larry's written opinion within 24 hours is
> > that makes this whole issue dangerous. 
> 
> What change?

i wanted to say 'apparent change' - as the issue presents itself to me,
based on the incomplete snippets of information i have on this mailing
list. Your first statement reads:

> The clause is specifically designed to target those companies which
> produce or sell commercial SCM systems. [...] The open source developers
> have nothing to worry about.

this reads to me: "even if i'm an SCM developer i am using BK fairly as
long as i license my SCM code under an open-source license." Is this an
incorrect interpretation of your words?

the second statement:

> > Larry, I develop for the Subversion project. Does that mean my license
> > to use bitkeeper is revoked?
>
> Yes.  It has been since we shipped that license or when you started
> working on Subversion, whichever came last.

Subversion itself appears to be licensed under a Apache-ish license, so a
cursory interpretation of the first statement qualifies it as an
'open-source' project. It might or might not be worth anything, it might
or might not be related to a commercial entity otherwise, like each and
every other open-source project - commercial activities and open-source do
not exclude each other.

	Ingo

-
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/