[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] grokking arch
|
From: |
Robin Green |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] grokking arch |
|
Date: |
Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:53:20 +0000 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 05:16:25PM -0800, Tom Lord wrote:
> BTW, you mentioned that your presentation of this was thwarted because
> of some BK licensing issue. Are we to infer from this that BK is
> used internally at RH?
Funny, I would have thought that in that case the BitKeeper license could
_at most_ prohibit contributing slides such as these to the arch project
(including presumably this mailing list), rather than prohibit using the
slides internally.
How can Bitmover restrict you from talking about alternatives to Bitkeeper
*internally*?
I'm obviously misunderstanding what's going on here...
--
Robin
pgpv50LGtF_FE.pgp
Description: PGP signature