Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267471AbTGZSzW (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 14:55:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267491AbTGZSzV (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 14:55:21 -0400 Received: from nat-pool-bos.redhat.com ([66.187.230.200]:34504 "EHLO chimarrao.boston.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267471AbTGZSzU (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2003 14:55:20 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 15:10:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com To: Larry McVoy cc: Leandro Guimar?es Faria Corsetti Dutra , Subject: Re: Switching to the OSL License, in a dual way. In-Reply-To: <20030724215744.GA7777@work.bitmover.com> 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: 1011 Lines: 29 On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Larry McVoy wrote: > A clone is illegal because you'd have to reverse engineer to do the > clone and reverse engineering is allowed for the purpose of > interoperability, not for the purpose of making a clone. This is a good point to remember, especially since you contradict it later on in your own mail. Making a program to extract data from a bitkeeper repository is fine. It is covered by this interoperability clause. What is arguably (not) fine is making a program that does everything bitkeeper does and does it in the same way, ie. creating a bitkeeper clone. However, that has nothing to do with a program that can extract data from a bitkeeper repository but quite clearly isn't a bitkeeper clone... -- Great minds drink alike. - 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/