GitLab Acquires Software Chat Startup Gitter, Will Open-Source the Code (venturebeat.com)

According to VentureBeat, "GitLab, a startup that provides open source and premium source code repository software that people use to collaborate on software, is announcing today that it has acquired Gitter, a startup that provides chat rooms that are attached to repositories of code so that collaborators can exchange messages." From the report: GitLab won't bundle it in its community edition or its enterprise edition yet, but it will open-source the Gitter code for others to build on, GitLab cofounder and CEO Sid Sijbrandij told VentureBeat in an interview. What's happening now, though, is that as part of GitLab, Gitter is launching a new feature called Topics, where people will be able to ask and answer questions -- sort of like Stack Overflow. "Although Gitter is best in class with indexing things, it's still sometimes hard to find things," Sijbrandij said. "In this Q&A product, it's a lot easier to structure the Q&A. You're not dealing so much with a chronological timeline where people have different conversations that cross each other. There's a location for every piece of knowledge, and it can grow over time." That technology is already available in beta in Gitter rooms on GitHub, and it will become available on GitLab's Gitter pages over time, Sijbrandij said.

Comments

Can't wait for the Git fad to die out.

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't wait until the Git fad finally dies out. I've worked with a number of teams that use Git, and they all use it like a centralized VCS, except it's more awkward to set up and use than a VCS like SVN or Perforce or even CVS is. Then they spend more time arguing about whether or not to rebase than they spend actually developing software.

It's a real shame that Mercurial didn't win out. It's a superior DVCS in every way, except for not having as much mindless hype surrounding it. But I suppose in some ways that's one of its best features, too. It hasn't attracted all of the fools that Git has.

Re:Can't wait for the Git fad to die out.

[Aighearach]

I think it is funny, too. When I used svn, I tried to use it in the ways that it was good at, and if you set up the directories right it is simple and painless even in complex settings. Actual code collisions shouldn't be frequent anyways, so people can like one or the other better for that but it is really a different problem.

I switched to git for offline commits, which svn added but too late to prevent people switching. Once you switch all your practices to the ones that are best with git, then git becomes better. But if you were already using practices best for svn, it didn't start out better.

What is obvious is that a lot of people want to do things their own way instead of the way that is a best practice using the tools that they're using. So then they'll prefer whichever software is least painful using their own weird system. But sharing code with them will be painful for others, and no version control system is going to help with that.

Re:waste of money

[The Raven]

That's a silly comment. GitLab is buying Gitter so it can be incorporated into their own platform eventually. They're buying a well-made codebase to improve own product. They could have written it themselves, but they decided that their time to create an equal feature would have been longer or cost more that buying it.

GitLab needs to compete on features with GitHub, who is winning the popularity contest by a wide margin.

Also, "will not be adding it directly now" is not the same as never. I still think the long term goal is to improve GitLab using features borrowed from Gitter.

Re:Startup?

[XXeR]

GitLab, a startup that provides open source

Sorry, be specific then, it's in the title of the article for Gitter:

GitLab Acquires Software Chat Startup Gitter, Will Open-Source the Code