Ben Collins-Sussman <email@example.com> writes:
> clkao, who does a fantastic job of maintaining our SWIG/perl bindings,
> has the beginnings of a new version control system written. It's called
> "SubversionKeeper" (svk), and it's modeled somewhat after Arch or
> Bitkeeper. It's a decentralized network of repositories, and users
> "push" changesets around at each other using the RA layer directly. The
> new system doesn't use libsvn_wc at all -- clkao has written his own
> lightweight working copy system. And to top it all off, he's even doing
> some degree of "smart merging", i.e. using properties to track merges.
> Really impressive stuff.
By the way, I hate to have to do this, but it is necessary to point
out (publicly) that I and several other developers have explicitly
asked clkao, several times, *not* to call it SubversionKeeper, because
that's too close to "BitKeeper", which is a trademark of BitMover Inc.
To call his product SubversionKeeper implies some sort of connection;
to some it might even falsely imply some sort of endorsement or
approval by BitMover.
I hope he changes the name. But in the event that he does not, I need
to make it clear that the name is entirely his decision, that we have
no control over it, and in particular that all of the CollabNet
developers have tried to get him to change it. We will never
distribute svk or anything related to it as long as it has this name,
which we feel is confusingly close to BitKeeper's.
Our inability to enforce BitMover's trademarks on others should not be
taken as an endorsement of any infringements that may occur.
To be utterly, *completely* legally safe here: -1 on any of those
custom props appearing in our tree until the name is changed. (Not
the name of the prop, but the name of the software that produced them,
that is. To store the props might be taken as an implicit endorsement
of their source.)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Wed Nov 5 20:22:35 2003