Public Access to Perforce?
bmilekic at FreeBSD.org
Wed Aug 18 07:42:52 PDT 2004
David Rhodus wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:57:19 +0400, Roman Kurakin <rik at cronyx.ru> wrote:
>> I fully agree with you. But this not affect "open source"ness.
>> I'd rather call it open development.
>Yes, it does when the public doesn't have direct access to the
>development work going on. Thats what started this thread in the
> Steven David Rhodus
When are you and some of your DragonFly minions going to stop spreading
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