Re: BK kernel workflow

Kyle Moffett
2004-11-01T03:16:59Z

On Oct 31, 2004, at 18:44, Larry McVoy wrote:
> Come on Pavel, you think I'm stupid enough to tell you that you can
> touch
> BK? No, I'm not. No, you can't. Under any circumstances. You've
> long
> since lost that priviledge and you aren't getting it back.

So you are saying that at one point (X days ago) he could have written
his
own BK2CVS tool without an issue?

I do not know for certain, but I will guess that Pavel has not done
anything
blatantly illegal or violated the BK license in any way you can prove.
I am
also guessing that he has not signed any additional contracts or EULAs
with you.

You also appear to be stating in this email that he may _not_ now write
his own BK2CVS tool.

What changed? (Aside from derogatory opinionated remarks in a public
forum which, AFAIK, are not significant in any court of law)

> You've got the BK2CVS tree, I suggest you use it. That's all you get
> and
> no amount of dancing around with my words will change that.

You were stating earlier that you are not trying to trap people into
BK, but
these statements appear to be much to the contrary of that position.

One could theorize that the "preferred form" for the kernel is a tar.gz
or
tar.bz2 file of the sources, and since you distribute through BK _all_
versions of the kernel, you must also provide a way to get the
"preferred
form" for any particular version. I realize that this is somewhat
difficult,
but if you are going to use contractual crap to restrict Pavel's rights
to
get at his BK data, then you probably ought to offer to send anybody
a tar.gz or tar.bz2 of any version of the sources at any particular
time.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a17 C++++>$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)>$ P+++(++++)>$
L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+
PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e->++++$ h!*()>++$ r
!y?(-)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------