MySQL has ended its five-year relationship with BitKeeper and handed all code management for its database to a Canonical-backed system to secure broader community input on development. Sun's open-source database has migrated its code to Bazaar, a distributed, free revision control system sponsored and supported by Canonical, …
feel sorry for BitKeeper, that's what happens when you fail to understand the development practices.
Ultimately you can't have certain people or businesses lording over your project. Why do we think Richard Stallmen went to all the trouble of replacing _every_ single tool in the toolchain to create a platform to develop on. I'm sure gcc wasn't easy to develop but it needed to be done.
Now we see an elegant proof why.
Git works well
Not sure Linus really appreciated the word Git in the English parlance though.
He seems to know the flavour, but not quite the % of derision in it, perhaps it is Finnish humour.
Still, works well as a version'ing system.
Very hard to make money selling tools to developers, that is what opensource is really, a load of development tools.
Even something like IDAPro will topple someday, dev tools are just the things developers are interested in creating and giving away.
User in the open source world actually means another developer. Which is something just plain ol'users find hard to grasp really. Comments like; well write your own fix, are not meant as insults, more hopeful expectation.
It's worth pointing out that Linus still talks very highly of BitKeeper's functionality - see his Google Tech Talk "Linus Torvalds on git".
@Martin Owens, I don't think they "failed to understand the development practices", especially given the list of customers on BitKeeper's web site. It seems that a number of open-source projects started using it because of it's superior features, then only to realise the issues surrounding licensing and developer contributions. I don't see how this is a fault of BitKeeper - a business model was chosen and they decided not to relax their rules. I imagine that it's a profitable business regardless of whether or not some large open-source projects use it.
I love and use git, cvs, subversion, accurev, perforce, mks, even ClearCase and SourceSafe, whatever but they all are missing something, the real view of complexity of development on business level. Even ClearCase and other very expensive (and hard to manage) systems are not on the level for example Panvalet was on late 70's. So - of course you go on what you need but, unfortunately, these system are made from engineering point of view, not for user, not for managing projects, not for development teams on different locations and time zones, not really have all the capabilities to manage several development branches and versions, etc.
BitKeeper is no different, a nice system but instead of of functionality they are more interested of the money and marketing. And good for them IF they can make it. Which seems possible in todays IT environment.
The Bigger Picture .... in NEUKlearer Skies and HyperRadioProActive Clouds
"This model has several advantages to using a straight HTTP DAV-aware caching proxy, in that each slave can respond to all read-only requests without ever having to relay them to the master backend." ..... http://subversion.tigris.org/svn_1.5_releasenotes.html
That is much more an AIdD to Constructive Virtual Revolution than any Tool of Guerilla Tactic Subversion.
@paid for dev tools
There are some great tools out there for development, and i am branching off CVS type apps to IDEs. Both Zend and Komodo are fantastic for development, but if i have not paid for the OS, nor the software then its a hard sell to get me to pay hundreds for a development tool.
When i was alot younger and looking for a language to learn i initially looked at VB, but the cost of buying it was so high it didn't allow any room for a trial to see if it was for me or not.... enter open-source and i have not looked back.
was, I suspect, a dig against the completely valid and legal actions of Tridge to reverse engineer the BK protocol (he never signed no contract, and how do you think Samba started???). Linus liked his friend more than freedom and threw one hell of a hissy-fit (only Theo DeRaadt threw a more insane and bigger one when people used the BSD code as they liked: GPLing it).
About the name "Git"
Actually, it was in reference to linus's opinion of Andrew Tridgell who was reverse engineering BitKeepers protocol across the wire to try and create a clone, which was against the licence of BitKeeper.
So linus was forced to dump BitKeeper after Larry McVoy decided to renouce the licence given to the linux kernel project and withdraw the software from use, so linus wrote the first version of Git
Who do you think he thought was a "git"
so now you know, the name wasnt an accident, or finnish humour :D
Flash Git ..... AIMiable Rogue Mode. :-) Cogito Ergo Sum
Open Source does not Generate Cash Flow, IT just Enables IT to Flow as Total Spend on Future Projects within Present Programs.
Currency XXXXChange is an Artificial Construct within the System to Introduce Fresh Virtual Life Blood to Establishment InfraStructures. IT also Justifies Bankers Existence.
There are a lot of Bankers out there who aren't Bankers at all, for they do not Play with Risk. That leaves them Vulnerable to Bankers with Islamic Banking XXXXPerience/Fiscal Epiphany. :-)
A Painless MakeOver for Promising Systems.