On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 01:08:58PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 18:08:02 -0800, Larry McVoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > is to clarify the non-compete stuff. We've had some people who have > > indicated that they believed that if they used BK they were agreeing > > that they would never work on another SCM system. We can see how it > > is possible that people would interpret the license that way but that > > wasn't our intent. What we would like to do is change the language to > > say that if you use BK you are agreeing that you won't work on another > > SCM for 1 year after you stop using BK. But after that you would be > > I don't even plan working on some SCM system, but being > tainted for 1 year for just *using* BK is not worth the price IMHO.
I agree, the price is just too high. No matter how much I like BK, I would give it up. Jeff.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
