| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Mercurial loses a developer
Mercurial loses a developer
Posted Oct 3, 2005 7:14 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433)In reply to: Mercurial loses a developer by Ross
Parent article: Mercurial loses a developer
Note he did say "he wouldn't work on Mercurial while his employer used BitKeeper".
In other words he doesn't feel beholden to any non-compete that goes even minutes beyond the cessation of the relationship. If his employer dumps BK one day, he'll be back with Mercurial the next.
At the end of the day, whether we like Larry's stance, my feeling is that he has been open and consistent about what his intentions and motives are, and he's acted on them. This sort of thing was pretty obvious from day one, and nobody should be saying they're surprised.
Cheers,
Wol
(Log in to post comments)
Mercurial loses a developer
Posted Oct 3, 2005 18:21 UTC (Mon) by piman (subscriber, #8957) [Link]
> whether we like Larry's stance, my feeling is that he has been open and consistent about what his intentions and motives are, and he's acted on them.
Which is why he change the license repeatedly to make it more restrictive, eventually dropped the free version, and then started going after commercial users.
Larry's only been open and consistent if you classified him into "software hoarder" from the start, and few people did.
Mercurial loses a developer
Posted Dec 21, 2005 6:31 UTC (Wed) by amikins (subscriber, #451) [Link]
> Which is why he change the license repeatedly to make it more restrictive, eventually dropped the free version, and then started going after commercial users.
There is a consistency here; he changed the license repeatedly to remove what were effectively loopholes in his very clearly stated purpose. The removal of the free version was because he found that there was no way to prevent someone from accomplishing what he didn't want accomplished as long as there -was- a free version.
Ultimately, this path only happened because McVoy was too -optimistic- that people would do things 'his way' without a chain link fence with barbwire on top.
While I don't agree with the steps he's taken, they are logical reactions to events that have occurred given his goals as a proprietary software developer.
Ultimately, the problem is that he was trying to convince everyone -- even himself -- that he wasn't a proprietary software developer, and that's why we are where we are.