Public Access to Perforce?

Bosko Milekic bmilekic at
Wed Aug 18 07:42:52 PDT 2004

David Rhodus wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:57:19 +0400, Roman Kurakin <rik at> wrote:
>> I fully agree with you. But this not affect "open source"ness.
>> I'd rather call it open development.
>> rik
>Yes, it does when the public doesn't have direct access to the
>development work going on.  Thats what started this thread in the
>first place.
>                                            -David
>                                            Steven David Rhodus

  When are you and some of your DragonFly minions going to stop spreading
  this garbage?

  If you want to talk about open-source, why don't you divert the attention
  to the frankly cowardly behavior going on pertaining to parts of the
  DragonFly source tree instead?  Whereas DragonFly has appropriated a
  significant amount of FreeBSD code, only to ammend the lisencing to its
  own network code to include the advertising clause (removed officially
  from the BSDL a while ago now), and for what? Only to make it difficult for
  FreeBSD to take some of the code back.

  So if you want to talk about 'shitty open-source
  practises,' I'd argue that yours are much more significant than ours.


More information about the freebsd-current mailing list