BitMover Releases Open Source BitKeeper Client 255
diegocgteleline.es writes "Larry McVoy, the owner of BitKeeper (also one of the guys behind LMbench) has posted a message to linux-kernel where he announces a open source client of BitKeeper, which would only allow synching against BK trees. It looks like it's licensed under the NWL (No Whining License) that will force you to 'not whine about this product or any other products from BitMover, Inc.'"
No Whiners License... (Score:5, Funny)
No WINEing? (Score:2, Funny)
Ba-dum-ching.
Re:No WINEing? (Score:3, Funny)
00:03 [cue groans]
Re:No Whiners License... (Score:3, Funny)
Bazaar-NG (Score:5, Interesting)
Right know, I put my expectations on Bazaar-NG [bazaar-ng.org]: all the goodies of GNU Arch and the simple interface of Subversion. Developed by Canonical (of Ubuntu fame).
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:5, Insightful)
The point of this article is that you no longer need to use the "we own your soul" closed source BK client just to download the kernel; you can use the open source client instead.
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:2)
Of course, you never did anyway. There have been numerous ways to get at the up to date kernel source for a long time without requiring bitkeeper (e.g., bk2cvs).
Hey! You're whining! (Score:2)
I hope you are not in violation of the license, or that you have not agreed to the license.
Re:Hey! You're whining! (Score:2)
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:5, Insightful)
In any case, I think it is a fine combination when the core functionality of a program is written in a statically typed language, and UI binding it together is written in a dynamically typed language.
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe you'd prefer a haskell implementation ? Darcs [abridgegame.org] is decentralized, based on a "theory of patches" with roots in quantum mechanics.
Written in Haskell, darcs [abridgegame.org] is used on many operating systems including Linux, MacOS X, FreeBSD, and Windows. Darcs includes a CGI script to browse your repository from the web.
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, we all know scripting languages suffer from buffer overflows and other serious flaws. So sgi, NATO and Viacom and gentoo did it all wrong:
http://www.zope.org/Resources/ZopePowered/ [zope.org]
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/index.xml [gentoo.org]
The fact that the use of Python is listed as one of the top features indicates that the programmers behind this
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:2)
That's right. I don't see SourceForge using it. (They've certainly shown how unscalable CVS is, with the way they've had to bend over backwards just to provide reliable anonymous read access to a large number of clients -- something a dumb-server-model VC system can do literally as easily as scaling up webspace).
This whole thread is really, really silly.
If you're familiar with Arch (from which Baz-NG copies the good ideas and throws away the bad ones), it's s
Re:Bazaar-NG (Score:3, Informative)
Dude, read the Bazaar webpage. Just the front page. It's clearly not a fork. They want to have some level of interoperability, but that's about it. They wrote it in Python and have a totally different user interface.
NWL (No Whining License) (Score:5, Funny)
Re:NWL (No Whining License) (Score:2, Funny)
What are these "Jobs and Girlfriends" things of which you speak?
Re:NWL (No Whining License) (Score:2)
(does it include "no compete" clause?)
Re:NWL -- I'd rather the MS-EULA (Score:2)
Bitkeeper website (Score:5, Informative)
"BitKeeper has made me more than twice as productive, and its fundamentally distributed nature allows me to work the way I prefer to work - with many different groups working independently, yet allowing for easy merging between them."
-- Linus Torvalds, February 2004
Linus did it. I can too! *jumps on the bandwagon*
Re:Bitkeeper website (Score:4, Interesting)
1. He wrote scripts so that he didn't have to jump between applying patches and reading e-mail, instead he is now reading a batch of patches, queuing them, and then starts a script to apply them.
2. Developers have instant access to Linus' tree. Any source control system would have provided this.
3. The comments to the patches in the e-mails sent to Linus now actually make it to the public. Just about any GNU project does this via ChangeLog under any revision control system.
4. A script was written to automatically extract release notes from the changelog comments.
5. Merging with subsystems maintainer is easier if they pile up the patches in bitkeeper repositories.
Maybe all of the above together yielded a factor of two. But only with respect to 5. is BK at all relevant. And even there -- by a HUGE amount the largest merge point is Andrew Morton, who uses quilt instead of BK to manage his tree with some hundred patches per week throughput to Linus. And I haven't read any complaints from Linus that he isn't using BK.
Re:Bitkeeper website (Score:2)
BitKeeper was written for the way Linus works (literally-- Larry worked with him to make it so), so it had all the inherent advantages of any source control, but the added advantage that Linus didn't have to adapt himself to the software.
Re:Bitkeeper website (Score:2)
No whining? Weak! (Score:5, Funny)
- shadowmatter
Re:No whining? Weak! (Score:2)
I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Perforce Licensing (Score:5, Informative)
Blockquoth the site:
Re:Perforce Licensing (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:3, Insightful)
"State of the art" doesn't mean "best overall implementation". It means that it implements the most recent advances in the field. Perforce is actually quite conventional (being originally based on either RCS or SCCS--I can't recall which). It uses the "single authoritative repository" model of version control.
The "state of the art" in version control is exploring the model of distributed and decentralized repositories. BK,
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:5, Informative)
With Bitkeeper it's very easy for every organization - and even every developer - to have his own "fork" of the tree which acts as a "master repository" for others to create branches off of.
For example, within RedHat, they can have one (or many) child branches from Linus's branch (or any other developer's branches); and "reparent" the branches as needed to merge in the various pieces they need. Other employes' repositories may point to one inside RedHat; or they may point to Linus's; and of course they can "reparent" their repository to switch between the two as needed.
Similarly, any company or group of developers can have similar structures.
Also; it's important to note that not everyone needs access to a "master repository"; and that indeed no-one needs access to a "master repository" except when they're merging with that master.
Bitkeeper works perfectly on my laptop in disconnected mode - and I have the full power of the source control system on my laptop even with no net access - I can create branches, merge branches, etc. If I'm traveling with someone else from the company I can merge my branches with his merely with a cable between the laptops - no connection to the home office is needed.
We used perforce at a previous company I was at with offices in China, Taiwan,Romania, and California and it was a horrible experience. Connecting to oversees repositories was painful; and merging changes between the oversees repositories sucked even worse.
Try BitKeeper. I'm sure you'll switch.
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:3, Interesting)
How would you know, Mr. Anonymous Coward? The fact is, very few employees at Red Hat use Bitkeeper at all. I should know,
Re:BitKeeper compared to Darcs. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:2)
The open source world is finally catching up to Perforce: Subversion is almost as good.
Bitkeeper uses a distributed model, so it doesn't require a centralized development model nor does it require continuous broadband access to a single central server.
There seems to be about 20 different projects trying to take
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:2)
There seems to be about 20 different projects trying to take on Bitkeeper. Nobody's quite there yet. My personal favorite is Darcs.
Have you tried a few different ones, then? What's better about Darcs? I've only used Arch and although it's pretty cool, it's a bit complicated to set up and it's pretty slow.
I'm just about to start a new project where a distributed repository would be useful, so I'm interested in what the options are.
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:2)
More or less anything is superior to CVS. Consider deleting directories or moving things or...
A reasonable list of the most obvious evils of CVS can be found as the list of features on the Subversion project home page [tigris.org].
CVS's only real advantage is ubiquity.
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:2)
More or less anything is superior to CVS.
This is not true. Some commercial VC systems still use a locking-checkout model, which is vastly inferior to CVS's non-locking merge-on-update approach. AFAIK, CVS actually pioneered that radical (at the time) model, and other systems have gradually picked it up. CVS does have some specific weaknesses in the implementation, but it's still head-and-shoulders above many older VC systems.
I haven't used Perforce, but from a brief look at their web site, it appear
Re:I wonder how this bitkeeper thing compares (Score:2)
Presentation about BitKeeper (Score:5, Informative)
NWL (Score:2, Informative)
* tarball.c copyright (c) 2003 BitMover, Inc.
*
* Licensed under the NWL - No Whining License.
*
* You may use this, modify this, redistribute this provided you agree:
* - not to whine about this product or any other products from BitMover, Inc.
* - that there is no warranty of any kind.
* - retain this copyright in full.
*/
This would never be approved by OSI (Score:3, Insightful)
-russ
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Rule of Thumb (Score:3, Insightful)
So far as I can see on their website, BitMover fall under that heading.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Rule of Thumb (Score:2)
perforce does - the pricing link on the front page takes you to the prices on this page [perforce.com]
Re:Rule of Thumb (Score:2)
Re:Rule of Thumb (Score:3, Insightful)
Customer: How much is it?
Salesman: How much do you have?
Re:Rule of Thumb (Score:2)
The real conversation is:
Customer: How much does X cost?
Salesman: How much do you have?
Customer: I have Y. But my company is so big, you are going to give it to me for Z (Z Y).
Salesman: OK.
Re:Rule of Thumb (Score:2)
Customer: How much does X cost?
Salesman: How much do you have?
Customer: I have Y. But my company is so big, you are going to give it to me for Z (Z < Y).
Salesman: My company is big too, but OK.
[three months later]
Customer: We've implemented it, but feature FOO doesn't work the way that you said it did! The world will end if feature FOO doesn't work!
Salesman: Sorry, you must have misunderstood me. You can buy third-party app BAR to provide that functionality. And pay us m
Going too far (Score:2)
I want to be able to whine all I want, and I'm prepared to whine about this until it is changed.
Open Source? I think not (Score:2)
From the Open Source definition:
What IS BitKeeper? (Score:2)
Would be nice if the article submissions actually contained some of this information...
OSS software configuration management tools - refs (Score:3, Informative)
There are lots of OSS/FS software configuration management (SCM) tools. CVS [cvshome.org], Subversion [tigris.org] (SVN), and GNU arch [gnuarch.org] get lots of press, but there are many others such as Aegis [sourceforge.net], CVSNT [cvsnt.org], Darcs [abridgegame.org], FastCST [zedshaw.com], OpenCM [opencm.org], Vesta [vestasys.org], Codeville [codeville.org], Bazaar [canonical.com] and Bazaar-NG [bazaar-ng.org].
You might also take a peek at my paper Software Configuration Management (SCM) Security [dwheeler.com].
Re:Strange (Score:5, Informative)
Don't be a stupid. At least read the mailing list posting:
Re:lets make fun of our users! (Score:2)
This is just his little joke, don't take it too seriously.
Indeed... (Score:3, Insightful)
The only thing resembling "whining" seems to be coming from Larry himself with this silly license. All it's going to do is make the acrimony WORSE, not better. Kind of childish, in my not so humble opinion.
Re:Indeed... (Score:2)
Re:Indeed... (Score:2)
Go, Subversion!
Re:Indeed... (Score:3, Insightful)
Larry's view is that it's whinning because they don't have to use BK and it not using it doesn't put them in a worse position than they were in before BK was adopted. He's kind of got a point there, though it's by no means black and white. Still the "whinning" could have been a lot worse. Just i
Re:Indeed... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that people who whined about BK being propietary should have shut their mouth up, but they didn't. When Linus switched to BK, he made clear that he would NOT force to anyone to use BK, and that's how it has been: Linux kernel.org releases are released in GNU diff format, so everybody can code and contribute. The one reason why all^Wmost of the kernel developers use BK is because they aren't stupid, BK is a great tool and can save hours of work, and it lets them to work easier between those who use BK. When someone wants to get a patch to get merged they also made the GNU diff format patch available, and even if they didn't, bkbits.net provides you a link to get a GNU diff patch for every changeset out there. Those who claim [gnu.org] that "anyone who wants to closely track patches to Linux can only do it by installing that non-free program" to develop the kernel are just wrong because you have access to the latest [bkbits.net] kernel changes without installing a non-free tool. -mm and -ac tree are maintained using open tools, so I don't see where is BK being "required".
The one reason why people whine is because they want to have the advantages of BK, but without using a propietary tool. That's not possible, there's not a OSS tool comparable to BK, subversion arch and friends are not even close. Everybody agrees that having such tool would be great (Linus even tried to convince Larry to release BK under a open license) but there's not one.
IMHO is just like when RMS had to use propietary tools to start developing GNU - Linux developers just use BK because using a OSS SCM would mean the linux kernel development would slow down a lot, and that's not good (and again, if you are going to propose to use subversion, arch, etc, it probably means that you do not understand the frenetic kernel development needs and the power of BK)
Re:Indeed... (Score:2)
The problem is that people who whined about BK being propietary should have shut their mouth up, but they didn't.
How is this a problem? They don't like the license. Why shouldn't they evangelize their position? From their p.o.v., the problem is that good software is sometimes published under non-free licenses.
The one reason why people whine is because they want to have the advantages of BK, but without using a propietary tool. That's not possible...
It's software. Of course it's possible. It's sim
But is it enforcable? (Score:2)
But is the licence enforcable? Would any court take it seriously? And isn't the right to free speech "inalienable" in the U.S.?
Re:Strange (Score:5, Insightful)
-Tupshin
Re:Strange (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Strange (Score:2)
Re:Strange (Score:2)
so actually he isn't giving it away under any license... merely providing a download to it. kind of dangerous thing to start using(not that it seems to be good for anything but getting the latest snapshot out of the system).
Re:Strange (Score:2)
Don't be so sure. Judges have all sorts of discretion when you make statements about permission that go outside legal documents. That's exactly WHY legal documents exist, and why some of them will say "This is the entire extent of the legal agreement; no other statements are binding."
Keeping your mouth shut about a license (when you're the licensor) is the best policy. Larry has obviously chosen a policy less than best.
-russ
Re:Strange (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't worry about the license, it's a joke. BSD license OK with everyone?
Re:Strange (Score:5, Funny)
You ain't from round here, are ya, boy?
Open alternatives (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Open alternatives (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Open alternatives (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Open alternatives (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Open alternatives (Score:4, Insightful)
Gosh, get a clue, will you! Or read the lkml archives. Linus chose bitkeeper precisely because all the alternatives you mention don't cut it.
This is exactlythe attitude that keeps holding open source back. It's not about whether the source is open or not, it is about choosing the right tool for the right job. More people should understand this...
Re:Open alternatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
No, your attitude is the one with the problem. No current open source solution adequate? Then help make one that is- either by improving an existing alternative, or starting your own. If you don't have the skills/time to do so, encourage others who do to take it up. Just criticizing without doing anything about it helps noone.
Or just buy bitkeeper and get on with your day job.
Alex
Which is nice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, if all you need is some minor customization, maybe. But if it clearly isn't anywhere near being up to the task, pick something non-OSS. Earn some money, help out the projects where it is feasible to replace proprietary with OSS.
That is the way OSS projects prospers. I make a 98% solution a 100% one. That makes it a 98% solution for someone else, who'll make it a 100% solution for them. And the snowball is rolling. Not by one company breaking its back trying to bring it from 40% to 100%.
Kjella
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
That's fine, except most developers have no interest in writing a source control system. So given the choice of using a commercial SCS while working on the project they're interested in or working on a version control system, it's no suprise that many people choose the former and complain that there are no suitable open source solutions available.
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
To be fair, at the time Linus moved to BK they didn't cut it. Everyone still used CVS; Subversion was still under development; I don't think Darcs, SVK or any of the implementations of Arch even existed yet.
Re:Open alternatives (Score:3, Insightful)
Ya, somewhat smaller projects than the Linux kernel like Apache, Mozilla, the GCC and Debian just can't get off the ground since they don't use BitKeeper. Maybe if they switched they'd have better luck...
I mean really, it's Mr. Torvald's perogative to choose a source control tool he likes and sure when you're on someone else's court you play by their rules. But th
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
Linus has repeated stated that to him, it's not at all about philosophies but rather, practicalities. Linus uses what Linus finds practical, himself. He does not expect others to use tools, or licences, simply because he finds them practical but rather he'd prefer everyone use the tools they find the most personally practically, simply in order
Re:Open alternatives (Score:5, Informative)
That being said, it's not just about closed source, although that certainly is a factor, too (did you ever think about where those GNU tools you're (probably) using on a daily basis came from, and why they were created?); the problem with BK is not so much that it's closed-source, but that its "free" (as in beer) license does not permit you to work on any projects that could be seen as competing. That's a serious restriction of your own freedom, and it sure does overstep some ethical boundaries at least because it not only tells you what you can and cannot do with the software in question (BK), but also what you can and cannot do in the rest of your life. There is at least one kernel developer I can remember right now (Andrea Arcangeli) who got bitten by this - he already worked on Arch (I think - it may have been another system, too, though) in the past, so he simply could not use BK at all, and until now, he could not even directly access Linus' BK tree, instead having to rely on things like the bk2cvs gateway etc.
And what's also bad about the whole thing is that this is not the deal that was initially promised: initially, it was (basically) "you (the kernel developers) get to use our commercial product (BK) for free, and we get the opportunity to use the fact that you use it to advertise BK and show how it's able to efficiently handle even large projects". I can definitely understand why Andrea (and others) were upset, and while Linus had to take many things into account (and while it certainly is clear that BK did provide a substantial improvement over CVS), I think the criticism of BK is all but unjustified (and Larry's arrogant and condescending attitude which he showed in many, many lkml posts didn't exactly help, either).
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
subversion still has its warts, there are places where cvs is still more convenient than subversion, and bugs/issues with properties where subversion will eat your repository for breakfast. some aspects of subversion do not scale yet.
overall subversion is much more convenient to use (especially when digging out old commits from history), you just have to be careful. cvs is more cumbersome to use, but it's rock solid -- there's never any question if it's going to eat it
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
Ah! How could I not see it? All along I thought the problem was that writing version control systems and operating system kernels was hard. But now I see, it was just my attitude!
With my attitude freshly adjusted, inhuman quantities of software will flow from my fingertips. The elegance of my code will make seasoned programmers weep, and developers worldwide will swoon at the prescience of my architectural decisions.
No longer will I b
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
Subversion has a centralised repository design. It's totally inappropriate for Linux kernel development.
Arch is distributed but is difficult to work with. Not a very friendly interface, to say the least.
Also I think at the time Linus was migrating away from the "patch and diff" system, Bitkeeper was the only distributed tool that was sane and worked. The
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2)
It's very new but some brave folks seem to be using it for production development already. It helps that you can use it to mirror conventional svn repositories without special arrangements..
Re:Open alternatives (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately you can't just multiply "zero problems times ten thousand users" and end up with 0.
- Peder
Re:Strange (Score:2)
FTFA... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FTFA... (Score:3, Insightful)
I actually meant it in the nicest possible way
I like reading LKML and I like Larry and appreciate his gift but he seems to get sucked into the relentless BK flamewars and catalyse them sometimes which I think is unfortunate. He'd do himself a great service avoiding getting too involved imnsho.
I guess I didn't help just then. Ahh well. Sorry Larry et al.
Cheers
Stor
Re:Wishful thinking (Score:2)
Me? I don't really care. The relentless flamewars are tiresome though.
Cheers
Stor
Re:bitkeeper is not on my radar (Score:2, Funny)
Re:bitkeeper is not on my radar (Score:4, Insightful)
I admire your ideology-before-productivity attitude, though... inspiring.
You got the schematics to your fridge (Score:3, Insightful)
This is true for most real world objects. Only software is radically different.
You can also hack your own fridge all you want without dmca style rules coming into play.
So his anology works for a skilled craftsman anyway.
Re:You got the schematics to your fridge (Score:2)
Besides... no one is stopping you from tearing apart other people's binaries on your computer...
Unfair characterization (Score:3, Insightful)
That is a very unfair (and inaccurate) characterization of the grandparent post.
Productivity is only one factor, and often not the most critical one. Just as any liability lawyer, security consultant, or sysadmin whose had to recover using an offsite backup.
Your data is your most valuable possession. The cost (in time, energy, money, resources, you name it) of creating your data far outweighs the value of the hardware it resides
Re:bitkeeper is not on my radar (Score:2)
And one where they expect you to lease the software. Must make for easy decisions around lease renewal time.
Re:so... (Score:2)
Wikipedia knows it all! [wikipedia.org]
Re:so... (Score:2)
Karma whores are individuals, or messages themselves, that attempt to receive feedback in the form of karma points. Often these will be needless information (such as a link to a wikipedia article to the subject being discussed)
Re:so... (Score:2)
Karma whores are individuals, or messages themselves, that attempt to receive feedback in the form of karma points. Often these will be needless information (such as a link to a wikipedia article to the subject being discussed)
The parent I replied to, didn't know what BitKeeper was, I could have said 'yes, it is something like CVS', I could also just point him to a resource of information about it...
Sorry for trying to help, to put actual useful information in these comments... next time I'll bash Mic
Re: (Score:3, Informative)