Re: BK kernel workflow

Manu Abraham
2004-10-29T08:09:51Z

On Fri October 29 2004 2:45 am, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:03:42PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> > [complaints about the awful horrible evil BK2CVS tool]
>
> You
> do not get to use BK metadata to do so either, those are also our rules.
>

The contents of the BK, ie the metadata is Free software, licensed under the
GPL. Therefore i don't understand .. Isn't this then a violation of the GPL ?

Isn't this something like M$ stating that you are the property of M$ because
you are using one of their systems. Worser still ? Do you mean to say M$ owns
all *.doc, *.xls files etc as an example... If so, then that is really
bad ..

> Free software, at least
> some of it, is no more than a copy.
>

sarcasm ? Even the linux kernel is free software ..
Isn't this is just like M$ marketing talk ?

> It's my claim that I value free software even *more* than you do. Why?

It's a contradiction, considering the earlier two statements.

I agree to the fact that BK has made Kernel development faster, which has
therefore helped.

I'm not a BK user. I download the tarballs, but the statements by Mr. Larry
has shaken me a bit.

As per the statements by Mr. Larry, what i understood is that the BK metadata
belongs to Mr. Larry legally as per the US rules and regulations.

Manu
>