RE: FreeBSD 6.0 and onwards

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Chris Laverdure
> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 4:15 PM
> To: M. Warner Losh
> Cc: freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 6.0 and onwards
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 16:00, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > In message: <20041107034114.GA56337_at_crodrigues.org>
> >             Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc_at_crodrigues.org> writes:
> > : RCS, then how about Bitkeeper?  It is quite popular
> > 
> > It's license is totally unacceptible for our needs.  It is 
> worse than
> > commerical: it prohibits me from developing my own version control
> > system whether or not I actually use it to do so.
> > 
> > Warner
> 
> How is that legal?
> 

I read a discussion off of one of the linux lists about this. If I 
recall correctly, the owner of that software justifies it by saying 
that normally you have to pay for a license. Since he was not 
charging the linux ppl for it, he felt like he could put terms like 
that into their license, with his out being 'if you don't like it, 
you can buy a real license.'

I believe if you buy a real license to use BitKeeper vs. using their 
goofball 'free' license you can develop whatever you want. 

I have no say since I don't develop anything, but my 2 cents is, that 
product should not be used out of principle, even if it does everything
that needs to be done and more. The discussion I read pretty clearly
described to me the owner's attitude; it is not an attitude I would wish
to validate through support of the product.

-Will