[Mailman-Developers] Plea for Help

[J C Lawrence]

On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:35:24 +0200 (MEST) 
Victoriano Giralt <vic@vgg.sci.uma.es> wrote:

> My answer to point 3 is absolutely not. I'm trying to standardize
> CVS for all our inhouse development, at the very least for my own
> team and the teams in my area, and outside I'm the strongest
> proponent-evangelist of free software, so I'm not going to propose
> or spend a bit of effort on a proprietary product, once we are in
> the road to learn CVS.

As a tired voice of experience:  Please come back when you've
learned the agony of CVS.  If you still think CVS is just fine, then 
there's little reason to even look at BK.  

On a more minor note, please read BK's license.  While it is not
Open Source, you do get access to the source, you are able to fix
bugs and redistribute patches, there are no license fees (as long as
you're willing to publish your changelogs), and everything reverts
to GPL if BitMover Inc or Larry fails to maintain BK etc.

Essentially it treads the very narrow line between Open Source and
maintaining a business model that is capable of supporting a
software company via commercial licensing (companies don't want
their changelogs published as that becomes a shopping list for
headhunters).

-- 
J C Lawrence                                   Home: claw@kanga.nu
---------(*)                             Work: claw@varesearch.com
 ... Beware of cromagnons wearing chewing gum and palm pilots ...