Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 09:49:56 -0700
From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Inappropriate signatures
Message-ID: <20030913164956.GA9246@work.bitmover.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy <lm@work.bitmover.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <00f201c376f8$231d5e00$beae7450@wssupremo> <20030910165944.GL21086@dualathlon.random> <20030910180818.GA3534@work.bitmover.com> <20030913153956.GA527@elf.ucw.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030913153956.GA527@elf.ucw.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3036
Lines: 70

Other people may not agree with your view on this one Pavel.  Most people
read that signature and saw it as a negative comment about BitKeeper.

People have told me they believe that if BitMover isn't getting benefit
from the free use of BK, free BK will go away.  People don't want to have
to depend on my goodwill, they want BitMover to derive benefit so that 
my goodwill doesn't matter, it's just smart business to give BK away.

If that is really what people here think then that means there has to
be some benefit for BitMover.  One of the benefits is that we get to say
that the kernel team uses it and get some marketing advantage out of that.
But that benefit diminishes if what people are saying is negative.

It makes sense that people are uneasy about depending on BK given the
amount of work it takes to provide it and the amount of grief we take
for providing it.  I don't know why I didn't see that earlier, it's an
unstable situation.  

I know there are some people who will never be happy until everything
is GPLed, I can't help those people other than provide the gateway.
In return, those people need to stop whining, the gateway has to be
enough.  

For the rest of the people, I'm looking for suggestions on how to make
this situation more stable.  It took me a while but I can see why you
are nervous, I'd be nervous in your position.  I'm nervous about doing
any real marketing of the kernel's use of BK because I figured it would
lead to more flame wars.  I'm starting to think that if we were doing
that it might actually lead to less flames, based on the theory that we
would then need you so you continue to get BK for free.  If you have an
opinion on that I'd like to know it.

On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 05:39:56PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > We're providing the service which enables all of the below and without
> > our good will that service is at risk.  
> 
> Eh? You are providing a service and he provides you advertising. I
> can't see anything about slamming you. I guess that Andrea does not
> think about kernel developing as a business, so it is not really
> targeted at you.
> 
> But anyway its *his* signature.
> 								Pavel
> 
> > > /*
> > >  * If you refuse to depend on closed software for a critical
> > >  * part of your business, these links may be useful:
> > >  *
> > >  * rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.5/
> > >  * rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.4/
> > >  * http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
> > >  *
> > >  * svn://svn.kernel.org/linux-2.6/trunk
> > >  * svn://svn.kernel.org/linux-2.4/trunk
> > >  */
> 
> -- 
> When do you have a heart between your knees?
> [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]

-- 
---
Larry McVoy              lm at bitmover.com          http://www.bitmover.com/lm
-
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/