BitMover Releases Open Source BitKeeper Client

diegocgteleline.es writes "Larry McVoy, the owner of BitKeeper (also one of the guys behind LMbench) has posted a message to linux-kernel where he announces a open source client of BitKeeper, which would only allow synching against BK trees. It looks like it's licensed under the NWL (No Whining License) that will force you to 'not whine about this product or any other products from BitMover, Inc.'"

Comments

Strange

[anpe]

It looks like it's licensed under the NWL (No Whining License) that will force you to 'not whine about this product or any other products from BitMover, Inc.'

I doubt this could qualify as an free sofware license... Several kernel developers warned Larry that this would make the software opensource but not free. It's sad that he released it in such conditions anyway.

so...

[theguitarizt]

Is this BitKeeper thing sort of like CVS? It's probably one of those things where if I have to ask what it is, I probably wouldn't need to use it, right?

Wishful thinking

[stor]

It looks like it's licensed under the NWL (No Whining License) that will force you to 'not whine about this product or any other products from BitMover, Inc.'"

Let the whining begin! Far out, even the licence itself gives us something to whine about.

Larry seems like a reasonably smart guy but I think we could all do without his trollish antics.

Cheers
Stor

Re:No Whiners License...

[tabkey12]

What! He didn't release it under the GPL! That's appalling - waaaaaaaaaaa!

Re:No WINEing?

[Anonymous Coward]

How the heck is "Ba-dum-ching" funny? Does it in some way poke fun of dum guys named ching?

RMS

[Jason_D_Berg]

Well, that ought to finally shut up RMS...or maybe not...*sigh*

Re:Bazaar-NG

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm yes, 'cos no one has proven SVN scalable.

Apart from the thousands of sites that have already deployed SVN to replace large CVS repositories. Those guys don't count, because then you wouldn't have a point.

I'll go deploy some rinky dink Python script to replace my non-scallable SVN repositories right away, no-real-answers Mr. Software Engineer. No doubt a bit of interpreted script will easily outscale Subversion. I'll just believe that in my heart, without any proof from any of you.

Re:NWL

[squiggleslash]

You're modded as funny, but it really isn't GPL compatable and arguably isn't Open Source or Free Software either. It's incompatable with clause 6 of the GPL:

6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.

(My emphasis.)

I think the "no whining" thing is dumb comment to put in a license and shows a pointlessly contentious attitude by the Bitkeeper people, something they've shown ever since the question of "Why is a major Free Software project being developed using and depending on unfree software?" issue was raised. They'd have been better off saying "This is our business model. We appreciate it will not be considered appropriate for Free Software, and suggest Free Software developers look elsewhere", and leaving it at that. The criticisms, for the most part, were of Linus and his decision to use Bitkeeper until the Bitkeeper people wieghed in.

Not that it was necessarily bad for Open Source and Free Software that they did. There's nothing more helpful to your cause for the proponents of what you oppose to act like an ass.