On Thursday, March 7, 2002, at 03:15 PM, Larry McVoy wrote:
> If I had stayed at Cobalt and
> cashed out my millions, BitKeeper would be open source. But I didn't.
> So it isn't. Get over it. It can help now, we're trying to help now,
> we make it easy to get out of BK, so if/when a better open source answer
> arrives, you can get out. What more can you possibly ask for? I'm
> giving
> you an answer which helps, with no lock in, and the most extensive set
> of
> tools designed to make it so you can get out with all of your data
> intact.
> And you say you are insulted. I'm not sure it is you who should be
> insulted.
>
Last time I checked, it didn't matter if a person had "cashed out their
millions" for a program to go opensource. So fucking what. I'm a poor
college student, as many are, and yet, I still see a lot of useful
programs coming out. The Gimp, for one, was written by students at
Berkeley. Last time I checked, no one was making money off of
enlightenment, and they are all still poor. Stop fucking whining about
it and stop compromising your ideals for money. Also, before you can
say it, yes you've stated your ideals by saying that it WOULD have been
opensource if you had money. Well that means you believe in opensource
somewhat at least. Get over the money issue though. There are a lot of
people who could benefit from bitkeeper being opensourced, so why not go
and do it?
Serve others, not yourself.
Michael Bernstein
bernstein.46@osu.edu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:01:08 EST