Tom Lane wrote: > Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Oops! [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reinoud van Leeuwen) was seen spray-painting on a wall: > >> Why? I understood that using BitKeeper for free for Open Source projects > >> is allowed. (but IANAL). > > > Ah, but there's a problem with BK _actually seen in production_ in > > that people that work on competing products are not permitted to use > > it. > > In particular, I would have to resign from the project if we went over > to BK, as my employer (Red Hat) is affected by this restriction. BK > does not meet the accepted definition of Open Source because of this > unfriendly license clause.
How do the Linux kernel developer guys go from no revision system (just Linus's hard drive) to Bitkeeper and requring a signed authorization letter from each contributor? They went from too little to too much, and never hit the happy medium. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
