Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Canonical Plans a Version-Tracking Tool for Devs

Posted by timothy on from the even-fresher-meat dept.

daria42 writes "Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu, has started work on a new project which aims to make easier for Linux developers to find the latest open source software updates, no matter which distribution they are contributing to. The effort encompasses distributed bug tracking, revision control, language translations and more. Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth wants Ubuntu to take advantage of the software, saying: 'As the framework [for using code from across the community] sets, hopefully we are at the centre of it. Further down the pipeline we may need to differentiate on other grounds.'"

13 of 90 comments (clear)

  1. Differentiate...? by mph_az · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I assume from the sumarry that this means finding a niche that puts them apart from netbsd's pkgsrc and the gentoo system...both of which already address tracking source updates across multiple distros (and even OSes -eg pkgsrc and gentoo on bsd).

    What I would like to know is, are they going to spin it off into a commercial version as well (ala xchat) or simply live off of support or something else?

  2. Nifty. by millennial · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now if they make a similar project for the average end user that has the simplicity of Gentoo's emerge system, but is cross-platform, I'm sold.

    --
    I am scientifically inaccurate.
  3. Differentiate...?-GPL with Octane. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "What I would like to know is, are they going to spin it off into a commercial version as well (ala xchat) or simply live off of support or something else?"

    Well the mantra around here is "live off the support".

    1. Re:Differentiate...?-GPL with Octane. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      businesses will pay for a "gatekeeper" if they provide enough value. Red Hat's doing nicely, but it's still a seller/buyer thing.. not cooperation. You're still at Red Hat's mercy for the next "boxed" copy if you need something important fixed...or risk going "on your own" until the next version.

      The big draw for Ubuntu of course would be that the main version is always free... That means they have to have an idea to make money without per-seat fees... i.e. you'll download the free version for all your desktops and they'll make profit from helping you write custom software? I could see it spun as they help your business with tools and your payments directly help the community... i.e. schools, employees, etc. when it's something you'd pay for anyway.. I'm interested to see where he takes this!

  4. CVS and Subversion are centralised by AnEmbodiedMind · · Score: 4, Interesting

    CVS and Subversion are centralised in that there is a central repository.

    Systems such as ARCH allow a virtual repository that is fragmented across multiple servers - some of which might be official, and some might not.

    This lets you branch from a project, but still remain in sync with it, and more importantly do so without permission or help from the official repository.

    There is a lot more to it too.

  5. The Patron Saint of OSS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Shuttleworth, who sold his company Thawte to RSA in 1999 in a transaction valued at $US575million, believes Ubuntu will be one of the main beneficiaries.


    and


    "I am fortunate in that I do not have to worry about short term risks," he says. "I am trying to look a little further down the pipeline than most companies can and I would rather be at the centre of the tightening web than on the fringes.


    So in other words it takes both a secure position and money to make things happen in the OSS world. No vow of poverty there.
  6. SourceForge.net? by Kerhop · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not a Linux developer, but isn't this just another SourceForge.net?

  7. red flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Before you ask, Launchpad isn't open source. Yet.

    This post was going to be along the lines of "talk is cheap, I'll believe it when I see it" but here, look at the language they use:

    No, Rosetta is not Open or Free Software at the moment. Rosetta will probably become open source somewhere in the future but we don't have a date.

    That's hardly even a promise. They are now propriatary software developers, and it is immoral to support ubunto because of it, unfortunatly.

    1. Re:red flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      denying the world the source code is not nice and undermines the reason we allow copyright in the first place

      I'd be really interested to know what your reason for allowing copyright is, if not to allow author's of a work to have some control over it.

      I don't care about any of that. Why would I? It might make sense for businesses, but I'm not in the business of helping businesses to do better business.

      You're putting forth an argument about morality. Such arguments have limited use if they only take into account what a single person cares about. Now, if you want to take as your basis the assumption that businesses are wrong and should not exist, and that hence considering what is important to them is important, then do so. But make it clear, and I think you'll find that there are a limited number of people who will continue such a discussion with you.

  8. A File System for Linux by LinuxSneaker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With all of the fallout with BitKeeper and the need for a Version Control System, has anyone looked at a new filesystem with would natively support this? Not only would software development be great with it, but back-ups would be a breeze.
    Could name it VCFS (Version Control File System)...has anyone used those letters before (amid the NTFS, NFS, SMB, VFAT file systems)?

    1. Re:A File System for Linux by jimicus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well done, you've just described VMS' native filesystem.

      The problem isn't "keeping track of lots of files as they get updated and their versions change". If it was, CVS would be the perfect solution.

      The problem is "ensuring my changes don't break something you've just added", "integrating this with a bug management system so we know who committed what in order to fix what bugs", "making it easy for me to work on a long-term pet project, while not being obliged to commit this project to the main source tree in order to ensure it doesn't get broken by other people's changes over the course of time" and several others.

      AFAIK, there is no free (as in speech and/or beer) solution which handles all of the above in a particularly neat manner.

  9. red flag-RMSism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "You need to understand that OSS licensing is merely a set of terms in a transaction. If the terms are suitable for you, fine, if not, fine, but it isn't a moral dillema at all."

    RMS would disagree with you.

  10. Launchpad's Rosetta by tka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Will it result in inconsistant translations? I translated few of the item's and already noticed how somebody's translation differed from what I would've written. The Gnome finnish translation team does provide a dictionary for english > finnish ( http://www.gnome.fi/cgi-bin/sanakirja.cgi ) but will everybody translating from english to finnish use it? How about other languages? Who get's to decide which term to use in the actual release?