Re: New BK License Problem?

Larry McVoy
2002-10-05T19:51:04Z

On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 12:54:12PM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 05, 2002 at 03:47:09PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> >
> > > I have never looked closer at bk than I had to be able to check out the
> > > latest sources. I'm not doing any development with it and I'm not
> > > checking in anything using bk.
> >
> > What about Larry making available a special version of BK that would only be
> > able to perform checkouts?
> >
> > This special version could have a less controversial license, even be GPL
> > with source. This only to provide a tool to extract data out of public BK
> > repositories (like Linus' kernel repository) for people who don't intend or
> > aren't willing to actually use the real value of the full fledged BK.
>
> You can do this today. rsync a BK tree and use GNU CSSC to check out
> the sources. We maintained SCCS compat for exactly that reason.
> You've had the ability to ignore the BKL since day one if you aren't
> running the BK binaries.

Whoops, forgot one thing. Take the GNU CSSC sources, they look for

^Ah%05u\n

at the top of the file. Make them accept both "h" and "H" and then it will
work. We changed it so that ATT SCCS would overwrite our metadata.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm