Re: BK is *evil* corporate software [was Re: New BK License Problem?]

Rogier Wolff
2002-10-10T07:21:13Z

On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:55:00PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> Sure. And if you have 3-5 developers there is no reason to not use CVS,
> it works well enough. Or Subversion after it matures, or Arch, or Aegis,
> or tarballs+diff+patch.
>
> We can't, and won't, compete at that level. You're comparing free against
> what we charge. We're infinitely expensive in that comparison.

> [at 25-100 developers, BK makes sense]...

Larry,

Why do you "give away" BK for single-user use? That's to make
people familiar with the product so that they will know about it
when they DO need it in the case that they end up in a situation
where it does make sense. right?

Now you're saying that you don't want the market of 2-10 developers:
the other version control systems don't hurt enough.

Would it make sense to allow these people to use BK for free under
these circumstances, so that WHEN they grow, they are already
using BK, and know exactly how to use it?

My company with 2 developers will survive on tar&diff if you want
money for BK from us. We might decide that "tar&diff" still works
when we cross the 25 developer line..... You might want us to be
using BK by that time.

Roger.

--
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
* The Worlds Ecosystem is a stable system. Stable systems may experience *
* excursions from the stable situation. We are currenly in such an *
* excursion: The stable situation does not include humans. ***************