Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:01:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:00:57 -0400 Received: from realityfailure.org ([209.150.103.212]:8636 "EHLO mail.realityfailure.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 20 Oct 2002 18:59:08 -0400 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:05:22 -0400 (EDT) From: John Jasen To: Jon Portnoy cc: Richard Stallman , Subject: Re: Bitkeeper outrage, old and new In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 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: 1150 Lines: 28 On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, Jon Portnoy wrote: > Would it be okay to use Microsoft products to develop free software as > long as said products made development efficient? In my opinion, Bitkeeper > is no better than Microsoft due to the 'you may not use this if your > company develops competing software' issue. This is heavy-handed > authoritarianism. As Larry McVoy said before, they may not use the free version. They can buy the commercial version. > I can understand denying those individuals who develop > competing software a free seat; I most certainly don't agree with it, but > I can understand it. What about people who work for large companies that > may, in fact, have a product that could compete with Bitkeeper? As Larry McVoy said before, they can apply for an exemption. -- -- John E. Jasen (jjasen@realityfailure.org) -- User Error #2361: Please insert coffee and try again. - 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/