Wow, I sure hope that's not what people think. Here's the scoop. We kinda invented the whole distributed source management thing, go to google groups (if they

Wow, I sure hope that's not what people think. Here's the scoop. We kinda invented the whole distributed source management thing, go to google groups (if they are still there) and do a date search for changeset before 1998. Now do one today. That's all us. (in case they aren't still there, there were something like 16 hits for changeset before us and now there are zillions.) Is that proof we invented it, I dunno, it's something. We certainly raised awareness that Subversion, which started when we started, wasn't the way to go. What our EULA said, and says, is while you are using our system you can't contribute to an open source system that competes with us. If you want to work on some other open source you are fine. When you stop using our system, have the big fun, but while using it, no copying our stuff to some open source clone. Yeah, I know that makes many (all?) of you insanely pissed off. But we invented this stuff, we've been ahead of the curve a bunch of times, and open source is always right there ready to "rewrite" whatever we invent. Is it really so unreasonable that we don't want to hand whatever is next cool thing (in source management, right, that's cool :) to people and say "here ya go, have at it, copy it"? We don't think so because we spend tons of time and money figuring out a right answer. It was a lot of work and just like you, we'd like to reap some benefits from our work.