Code Repository Atlassian Buys Competitor BitBucket

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."

Comments

Git

[spec8472]

"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.

Re:Git

[yuriks]

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

Wow.

[FuckingNickName]

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?