Slashdot Mirror
Linus Tries Out BitKeeper
Flammon writes: "Linus has been overloaded
with patches for a while and recently the issue started to become hot again. In an unprecedented move, Linus has started using BitKeeper, as reported by Linux Today. The benefits of BitKeeper are already showing from the large amount of detail provided in the latest unstable kernel pre-release." eirikref adds: "Read Linus' own statement and take a look at the BK web interface."
IIRC, the PPC Kernel is maintained through BitKeeper, and has been for quite some time.
------
Random, useless fact: I type in startx entirely with my left hand.
Looks like I spoke to soon, looks like they will be maintained at http://linux.bkbits.net
Bitkeeper is available under two licenses. The commercial license costs money and comes with support. The non-commercial license does not cost money., but it has a requirement that all your ChangeLogs must be sent to a world-readable server controlled by BitMover.
Bitkeeper source is available, but it's illegal to redistribute a version of Bitkeeper with the mandatory open logging stripped out.
Bitmover Inc. wants to avoid the situation where people use bitkeeper like gcc, taking free software tools but not giving anything back. You can pay Bitmover money, or you can use a free-as-in-beer version that is suitable for software libre and unsuitable for closed-source software.
http://bitkeeper.com/Products.Comparisons.Perforce .html
Allthough this is marketing poop so it should be taken with a fine grain of salt, it might answer your question.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
I found very interesting a document from Jack Moffitt (of xiph.org fame,
u blic/critique.html
l
one of the main Ogg developers and one of the Icecast Core Developers),
about some problems he had with the BK license when he was using it
for hosting Icecast:
"A Critique of the BitKeeper License"
http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/user/x/i/xiphmont/P
You might also find interesting his post on the matter to the
"Icecast Developer Discussion List":
http://www.xiph.org/archives/icecast-dev/0067.htm
I hope that he will post here his his experience using BK
in an Open/Free-source project...
Best regards
\\Uriel
P.S.: Yea, I know I'm karma whoring, but I'm sure many people will find this interesting,
specially in casse Jack dont post to this history latter
"When in doubt, use brute force." Ken Thompson
No,
if you read the recent thread on l-k, it's because in private Linus has been talking for quite a while to the bitkeeper people about what he wanted from bitkeeper before he'd use it, and the bitkeeper people have gone and implemented most of it, so Linus agreed to use it for a while.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
> If CVS works for you, and you have no complaints or
> issues, then don't switch.
I really hate this kind of attitude. Along with "Use what you are most comfortable with". It kills any desire to learn and use new stuff and to impove.
I say try it out and see if it worth switching to new CM.
If you're happy with CVS, stay with it at least until Subversion is finished -- svn is designed to be a replacement for CVS which fixes all the annoying oddities.
If you're not happy with CVS, or have been wondering why CVS doesn't do some specific things, check out some of the really different alternatives (but be prepared for some differences):
- "Aegis" supports TestFirstProgramming. In order to submit a change, you must provide a test which passes with the change, and fails to pass without the change. Furthermore, your change must not break any of the old tests. Extremely powerful for group programming, and useful for single-person programming.
- "BitKeeper" provides an attractive GUI and powerful tools, designed by a professional community. It provides very powerful support for branches, and allows you to use all the convenience of the full version-controlled repository without having to have all your checked-in changes messing up the main repository.
- "arch" may have a simpler interface right now, but it makes up for it with a very impressive model of distributed repositories. Like BitKeeper, you can make a local repository in order to make changes you want to see; unlike BitKeeper, that local repository is a full repository in its own right, and can be served independantly. It supports very sophisticated merging, so that you can merge your local repo with someone else who happened to start up their own local repo based on the same master repo; you can, of course, also merge with the master, and the master can choose to merge with your work.
I am impressed with the variety of version control systems which are now coming into their own. Very nice to see.
-Billy