I note with some amusement that the fascinating eXplode paper describes at one point testing `an expensive commercial [version control] system we did not have source code for, denoted as expENSiv (its license precludes naming it directly)', and then proceeds to demonstrate the utter futility of such ludicrous license clauses by describing that version control system well enough to enable anyone to google up the real name of the version control system in about ten seconds. (The necessary description was only a few words, and I can't see how they could have mentioned *anything* about it without including that description.)
I shall not mention the name of that version-control system myself since the mention of ridiculous license terms in association with a version control system itself provides enough information to enable readers of LWN to unambiguously determine which version control system it is. The terms are particularly ridiculous because one of the bugs they found in it they also found in Subversion and several other version control systems as well, so would hardly serve as a reason not to buy it. (The ridiculous license terms, on the other hand, *would* be a reason not to buy it, as would its proprietary nature.)
Copyright © 2018, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds