On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Chris Wright wrote: > * jmjonesat_private (jmjonesat_private) wrote: > > > > All I can offer is that I talked to my attorneys and was advised against > > accepting BitKeeper's license based on my intentions and expectations. > > Attorneys think "differently" than technical people, which is why we > > hire them. They may be wrong, but not for me "in general". > > > > As a developer... BitKeeper's license is not "standard". If you work for > > a big company, aim your legal department at it. If they give the > > "go-ahead", go for it. The selection of BitKeeper has some issues... > > which may or not be relevant to your specific needs. > > The BitKeeper license is very sepecifically written to allow exactly the > type of development we are doing. Basically, as long as you don't mind > allowing openlogging where all metadata -- changeset file, changelog > stuff, and some bitkeeper specific files -- is sent to an openlogging > server then you are ok AFAIK. > > But none of us are experts, I'd suggest re-reading the BitKeeper license > and/or querying BitMover. If you are doing work that you don't want to > allow openlogging (i.e. propritary work) then you need a commercial > license (or another source control mechanism). > > > How hard/evil would it be to tarball up the whole development tree once > > every 24 or 48 hours? > > That seems overkill. We could simply provide the latest patch as well > as the latest stable patch (although i'd really rather not!). But before > we consider this please verify that you simply cannot use BitKeeper. > WE're developing a publicly accessable MPI, I'M developing a proprietary, commercial LSM/patch+device, as well as a GPL'd version designed as "community repayment." ... the needs (legally) are different. Technologically, the needs are similar. A daily "interim patch" automatically generated against the last stable kernel would be very useful. I suspect this will be under 100K, for a while. Simply tar'ing up the changed files would be similarly useful, with a simple script to include only the changed files. I *will* re-consult my attorney, but I suspect the answer will be the same... BitKeeper rocks, but the licensing is "open software" specific, more so than GPL. For commercial or other "payme" purposes, it's clearly a commercial product, and will cost me roughly $2000. Even extended commercial or proprietary use appears to be prohibitted. If it's not, no issue, but if I end up with "deep pockets", I'd rather not have a "silent partner". How are two or three (or even 5) cron'd commands to be executed at PDT midnight a real problem? Drop the files (automatically) to my webspace, I'll pay for the bandwidth to get them to the "world". > The work Stephen has done will be in BitKeeper today or tomorrow, and a > stable patch will be released at the same time. So you can also just > wait for that. I will, with "peeks" from the posted delta. > > -chris > Thanks, J. Melvin Jones |>------------------------------------------------------ || J. MELVIN JONES jmjonesat_private |>------------------------------------------------------ || Microcomputer Systems Consultant || Software Developer || Web Site Design, Hosting, and Administration || Network and Systems Administration |>------------------------------------------------------ || http://www.jmjones.com/ |>------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jun 19 2001 - 17:06:42 PDT