Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Code Repository Atlassian Buys Competitor BitBucket

Posted by kdawson on from the lazy-shrug dept.

Roblimo writes "Wow. Atlassian sent press releases out about this, and we're happy for them. But isn't Git easy to install and use — for free, even if your project is proprietary and secret, not open source and public? Whatever. Some people seem to feel better about proprietary software than about FOSS, and the majority of Atlassian's business comes from meeting the needs of behind-the-firewall, proprietary code repositories. At least Atlassian has free versions of its repository for FOSS and small-scale proprietary developers. Which is sort of nice."

5 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. Git by spec8472 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "But isn't Git easy to install and use"
    Yes, for certain users and environments.
    In my experience, The folks who use Mercurial are more likely to be on Windows.

    Mercurial tooling isn't as polished as the Subversion equivalents, but it's lightyears ahead of the Git tooling.

    I'd be happy enough to pay for good Git tooling on Windows, but there doesn't appear to be a way to do so. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

    1. Re:Git by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're right.

      But isn't Git easy to install and use -- for free, even if your project is proprietary and secret, not open source and public? Whatever. Some people seem to feel better about proprietary software than about FOSS

      Git does the job. But no, it isn't easy to use. It has an unintuitive set of commands, and various rudimentary, half-assed, poorly designed visual apps.

      e.g.
      git reset --soft HEAD^
      WTF?

      The proprietary Perforce dates from an earlier generation of SCM, and has a single code repository, rather than a distributed scheme. But it's commands and it's visual tool feel like they were actually designed. They are easy to learn, and need far less referring back to the manual. That's one of the reasons why people "feel better about proprietary software than FOSS".

    2. Re:Git by yuriks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It has perfectly fine branching, see http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-mercurial/

      On another note, what kind of retarded wrote the summary? It makes no mention of who Atlassian or what Bitbucket are and instead spends time being an inflammatory git apology that doesn't even make any sense given that Mercurial is also opensource and free.

      - a git/github and hg/bitbucket user

  2. Wow. by FuckingNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't understand what the article summary is getting at. A reposting of a press release? An expression of /.'s parent company's interest in some organisation? Or a "tweet" accidentally posted as a /. article? A side effect of think-aloud sleep-typing?

    1. Re:Wow. by kiwimate · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No kidding. I am not one who usually comments on article submissions or the quality of the summary - I just ignore articles if I'm not interested in them - but this summary would (hopefully) be marked as troll if it was read as a comment. Given that something this rubbishy is posted by a /. editor, it's driving me to read /. less and less these days. Rationale - if this tripe is what makes it on to the front page, and from an editor, then my assurance of the quality of what's posted and what's left out is way down. What other value does /. have for me?