On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: BitKeeper Cont. [was Re: My
>projects are gone (fwd)]":
> > I am not going to _force_ Larry to free BitKeeper. I have no intention of
> > doing that. I am going to gi
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote about "Re: BitKeeper Cont. [was Re: My
projects are gone (fwd)]":
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 07:39:46PM +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > Besides, for years the Linux kernel did not use any source-control
> > system at all, so
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 07:39:46PM +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> The only reason BitKeeper's license is a problem to the community is because
> Linus decided to use it for source-control of the kernel. This issue has been
> discussed to death in the Linux-Kernel mailing list. But why should you
>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: BitKeeper Cont. [was Re: My
projects are gone (fwd)]":
> I am not going to _force_ Larry to free BitKeeper. I have no intention of
> doing that. I am going to give Larry no choice but to free it. This is
> called outcompetin
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 02:58:59PM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> In any case, you have been warned about Larry's attitude. Since he started
> with BitKeeper, he pulled the public repository holding the source code
> off, made the license worse, and has grown entirely grumpy and unhappy
> about ever
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Omer Zak wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Oded Arbel wrote:
>
> > You are talking about taking control of another person's creation w/o
> > that persons agreement (!!) most people would call that outright theft -
>
> Ayn Rand, too.
>
I am not going to _force_ Larry to free Bi
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Oded Arbel wrote:
> You are talking about taking control of another person's creation w/o
> that persons agreement (!!) most people would call that outright theft -
Ayn Rand, too.
--- Omer
the null contributor t
Shlomi Fish wrote:
>Hi Oded!
>
>I love it that people decide the victim is the one responsible.
>
I have not examined all the evidence, but even judging from just what
you said my opinion is that you are in the wrong (and like any human,
I'm sure you are at least just a tiny bit biased in your
Hi Oded!
I love it that people decide the victim is the one responsible. Let me
explain some things:
1. I was offered to use BitKeeper and bkbits.net at terms I could accept
(i.e: I sent the patchsets to openlogging.org, don't see the source (even
though the site says otherwise), etc.). I happi
Shlomi Fish wrote:
>If anyone thinks of hosting his projects on bkbits.net - think again. This
>E-mail can prove it. While I may have (with doubt) been a troll, I never
>implicitly or explictly said that I want my projects being unhosted. That
>and I still like BitKeeper enough to try it for the
If anyone thinks of hosting his projects on bkbits.net - think again. This
E-mail can prove it. While I may have (with doubt) been a troll, I never
implicitly or explictly said that I want my projects being unhosted. That
and I still like BitKeeper enough to try it for the while for unimportant
t
11 matches
Mail list logo
