From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264379AbTKMTRP (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:17:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264392AbTKMTRP (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:17:15 -0500 Received: from host213-160-108-25.dsl.vispa.com ([213.160.108.25]:64667 "HELO cenedra.office") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S264379AbTKMTRO (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:17:14 -0500 From: Andrew Walrond To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kernel.bkbits.net off the air Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:17:11 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <200311131010.27315.andrew@walrond.org> <20031113162712.GA2462@work.bitmover.com> In-Reply-To: <20031113162712.GA2462@work.bitmover.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200311131917.11773.andrew@walrond.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is degenerating, but I don't want anyone mistaking my position, so... For the record and so nobody gets the the wrong end of the stick; I am a bk advocate. I use it for my open source activities, and urge others to do so as well. But... There are tiny minority of people (who work on other SCM projects) who cannot access my sources because they can't use BK. I don't particularly care, and I'm still using bk, but that particular clause of the bk license has caused Larry ridiculous amounts of grief for no discernable return. And I still maintain that a stripped out, redistributable, clone/pull only binary tool without the restrictive license would be a real smart business move. But it ain't my business, so I'll leave it there :) Andrew Walrond