Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 18:42:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 18:42:30 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]:40596 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 18:42:30 -0400 From: Richard Stallman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Bitkeeper outragem, old and new Reply-to: rms@gnu.org Message-Id: Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 18:48:22 -0400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1313 Lines: 24 The new restrictions on Bitkeeper, saying that people who contribute to CVS or Subversion and even companies that distribute them cannot even run Bitkeeper, have sparked outrage. While these specific restrictions are new, their spirit fits perfectly with the previous Bitkeeper license. The spirit of the Bitkeeper license is the spirit of the whip hand. It is the spirit that says, "You have no right to use Bitkeeper, only temporary privileges that we can revoke. Be grateful that we allow you to use Bitkeeper. Be grateful, and don't do anything we dislike, or we may revoke those privileges." It is the spirit of proprietary software. Every non-free license is designed to control the users more or less. Outrage at this spirit is the reason for the free software movement. (By contrast, the open source movement prefers to play down this same outrage.) If the latest outrage brings the spirit of the non-free Bitkeeper license into clear view, perhaps that will be enough to convince the developers of Linux to stop using Bitkeeper for Linux development. - 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/