Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Code Repository Atlassian Buys Competitor BitBucket

kdawson posted more than 3 years ago | from the lazy-shrug dept.

Software 150

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."

cancel ×

150 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Code Repository? (4, Informative)

nacturation (646836) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756312)

Atlassian is a corporation, not a code repository.

Oh yeah, I had to google them (2, Interesting)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756328)

I have seen their name inside a huge mess of java COTS which I was shovelling around as a part of a my day job. I doubt their main business is going to be operating bitbucket, more likely charging ten thousand bucks a seat for use of a copy of bitbucket inside corporate intranets, probably with some useless eclipse integration thrown in.

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (0, Offtopic)

nacturation (646836) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756344)

Goes to show you that kdawson + roblimo make an awesome combo.

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756346)

If you had to Google them, then you've been living in a cave for the last five years, and your opinion on them is worthless.

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (0)

nOw2 (1531357) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756576)

This may have modded down to Troll but it is true. Any developer that's tried doing things well should have at least heard of Atlassian, who now provide the definitive implementations of a great many essential tools.

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757356)

Nah, he's just been in industry for decades. Companies like this rise and fall every few years. Once you've been developing software for decades, you lose track of how many different source control systems, bug trackers, planning tools and "collaboration suites" you've had to use.

It has only gotten worse with so many of these apps becoming web-based. They're ALL shittier than real applications, and they all look like the same pile of shit, too.

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (1)

JonySuede (1908576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33758188)

I cannot talk about there other products but JIRA is really nice, the web interface does not suck and the eclipse plug-in work quite well

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (1)

eennaarbrak (1089393) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757256)

...I doubt their main business is going to be operating bitbucket

Probably true

, more likely charging ten thousand bucks a seat for use of a copy of bitbucket inside corporate intranets

I can't speak of bitbucket, but we bought one of their flagship products (JIRA) at something like $100 per seat. Most of their products are very competitively priced, and usually free for open source projects.

, probably with some useless eclipse integration thrown in.

I find their Eclipse plugins to be of excellent quality and a massive productivity booster in our environment. All the devs in my team are using it.

Re:Oh yeah, I had to google them (2, Informative)

Courageous (228506) | more than 3 years ago | (#33758080)

Their wiki is pleasant to use and a snap to manage. All of their products are quite affordable to any corporation. Typically something like $8K will get you an unlimited user edition. Sometimes less, depends on which product.

C//

Horde of shit (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756512)

So all you need to do to get an article on the front page of Slashdot these days is a factually incorrect, barely coherent rambling shite of text, provided it bashes proprietary software and sings the praises of FOSS.

Slashdot: news for narrow minded, deluded nerds

Re:Horde of shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757324)

I've pretty much switched to HN. I still check /. occasionally, but most of their interesting stories seem to have already appeared on HN.

Re:Horde of shit (1)

emag (4640) | more than 3 years ago | (#33761982)

Well, look at the submitter, who also authored TFA. The epitome of "factually incorrect, barely coherent"...

Re:Code Repository? (0, Flamebait)

Zoidbot (1194453) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757240)

No GIT is a pain in the ass to setup and use, with abysmal support. I gave up and used SVN instead.

Your point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756332)

Yes, git is free/open/... So is mercurial. And Git Hub, the service, is not free for private reps.

Then what's your point?

Git (5, Insightful)

spec8472 (241410) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756334)

"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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756396)

By tooling you mean GUI's?

http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/

Re:Git (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756504)

Also, command line. Even SVN is better than Git. And not just under Windows.

Re:Git (1)

JerkBoB (7130) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757326)

Crackmonkey.

Re:Git (1)

fusiongyro (55524) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756418)

I am a Mercurial user from way back, and my platforms of choice are OS X, BSD and Linux. Don't use Windows at all. But I would admit that it is somewhat easier for Windows users to get rolling with it than Git, or at least, it has been in the past.

Re:Git (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756500)

Translation, I am a MCSD and cannot possibly figure the shit out unless it has a Ok or Cancel button to click.

Re:Git (1)

omni123 (1622083) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756598)

The folks who use Mercurial are more likely to be on Windows.

Yep that's my experience as well--most likely cause being that Windows is a second class citizen when it comes to Git. Mercurial is Python based and less platform dependant.

Re:Git (2, Funny)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756672)

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.

What are you talking about? msysgit [google.com] is dead simple to install, and provides you with a perfectly functional Bash shell.

Yeah, I've been wondering how to increase the usability further, by using zsh instead of Bash, but this is not really a pressing issue since Bash is pretty awesome too.

Re:Git (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757322)

provides you with a perfectly functional Bash shell

There-in lies a problem. While I'd be perfectly happy to consider using Git there is no way I could recommend it in my workplace until such time as there are good "tools from noddies" like TortoiseSVN and VisualSVN. We don't really need a full DVCS, so we are not really Git's target audience, I'd guess there are many companies out there that could take advantage of a DVCS that won't consider Git for similar reasons.

Re:Git (1)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757402)

Here http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/ [google.com]

Now shut up and happily consider git.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757440)

Nice to know that exists (and is presumably stable+reliable). What about tools that offer VS integration?

Re:Git (1)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757562)

Want want want....

Re:Git (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756700)

Unfortunately, Mercurial gets one of the most important features of a DVCS horribly wrong. Not having cheap, fast, in-place branching is a deal breaker, and a mishmash of bookmarks, mq and other extensions isn't going to fix it.

Re:Git (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756864)

tell me more. My company is thinking of moving to Mercurial, and whilst I think its a fine tool, I'm a little concerned it wouldn't quite suitable for us (we have large repositories).

Re:Git (5, Insightful)

yuriks (1089091) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756996)

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

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

Re:Git (0, Offtopic)

whoop (194) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757612)

You must be new 'round here. It's Roblimo (is he still a Slashdot editor?). Nothing new.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757662)

Take a look at the OpenOffice.org, OpenSolaris or Netbeans repositories -- hg can handle huge repos quite well. And yes, hg has cheap, fast in-place branching -- dont believe the FUD by git zealots.

Re:Git (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757982)

Once you go git you don't go back.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33761524)

Wrong.

my history: svn -> git -> hg

after converting from git to hg, i don't miss a thing, especially not the pain of reading through the awful documentation...

Re:Git (1)

Lysol (11150) | more than 3 years ago | (#33759224)

Your company should have a real need for a DSCM, otherwise, Mercurial or Git have little value.

Merging/branching can be a little easier in Git vs. Svn. I've used it before on a team and have seen some things become easier; we had a dev working offsite with no access to our repo and we would just email back and forth the code dir every week and at the end of each week, merge in all his changes. However, this was more of a policy 'issue' on our end as I would have preferred not to merge his stuff in in the first place. Git does have some quirky things where it sometimes seems real easy to get your tree out of sync with the master. Then it becomes real fun to try to figure out what is wrong. Plus, hosting a Git server is not trivial. I hated dealing with Gitosis. An Svn server was much easier to setup in my opinion.

I liked Mercurial better than Git. For a Svn user, the commands are more in line on Mercurial. But again, you can get weird sync issues - I think that's just a side effect of a DSCM.

All this being said, I don't care much for DSCM's. If you have a small or medium team, then I honestly see no reason. The whole point of a SCM is a centralized repository. Checking into your local machine, imo, doesn't matter - there's no point. Your drive dies, so does your code. Plus, I want to do less and always having to push/pull to/from the master is an extra step - yah, lazy. Now, if you have a very distributed organization, then maybe a DSCM is valuable. But honestly, it's still hard to argue that it's more useful/valuable than Svn+ssh.

If you look at a lot of public Github projects, there's a lot of small OSS stuff that just needs a home. Github is a great service that found a good niche. But to host private repos, you gotta pay and there are no businesses out there that are gonna host their proprietary code out in the open with Github. No way.

Now, to have the best of all worlds I suggest a great service called SourceRepo. They have good pricing, like $7/mo for 1GB storage and unlimited users. You can create as many repos as you want in the big 3 - Svn, Git, and Mercurial. It's not meant to be social like Github is and I think fits businesses more. I've used their service for a few years now in multiple companies (as well as all my personal projects) and I've never had any problems. They also include (for free) each repo tying into the Redmine wiki and Trac.

Bottom line: thumbs down on Git and Mercurial unless you really, absolutely need a DSCM. 'Committing' code to your local drive with no centralized repo is complete novelty and really serves no purpose. That's where I think devs get sidetracked into thinking that DSCM's are cool - because I can just 'git ci' and I'm good. Wrong.

Re:Git (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#33759364)

Yes, I think that's the main issue - DVCS are 'cool' so lots fo devs want to use them, and then start making reasons why they are so fantastic, which pulls other devs in, and eventually management hears about it and starts believing the hyped up bits. Mercurial was positioned as a perfect solution to rolling changes to multiple branches. (when I think the problem is a human one, SVN is perfectly good for merging, until things get complicated and then all VCSs are complicated).

We have a 12Gig SVN repo so thanks for the plug to sourceRepo, but we'll stick to hosting our own internally :) I have no problem with SVN, it works fine,just that some devs from HQ are pushing for the 'cool' option, probably becuase its.. well, cool.

Re:Git (1)

Pastis (145655) | more than 3 years ago | (#33760462)

I think youre missing on a lot of values a DSCM can bring you.

Some of my clients use svn, I use git svn bridge. Some of the things I can do:
* have one directory extract locally
* full local history
* stash / pop when a quick fix request comes in
* local branches (I used to have multiple checkouts laying around with svn...) Particularly useful when working disconnected (travelling, or on site without access to companys network). And that helps me make multiple commits, which makes my commits easily reviewable. Otherwise I face the I might "have to merge" fear that I have with SVN.

As for some of your arguments
* you say businesses wont host in the open with github but you advice another service? I am pretty happy to use github for my business. I also have other servers for build etc
* extra step ? Crap. In many cases, the merge in git helps you to go faster. Yes you have multiple commands, but the operations are faster and save you time (merge after commit instead of update breaking your changes)
* hard disk breaking ? Thats crap. Just sync your disk with your server. You should do it anyway with subversion. And its faster than syncing your multiple checkouts directories.

Now I recognize that git is isnt easy to use. I stick to the minimal. But dont dismiss DVCS beacuse you havent found value for them. Try git svn for a week. Then come back.

YMMV

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33761218)

This is no insightful, it is dead wrong... please stop spreading this propaganda about Mercurial lacking cheap, fast, in-place branching when Mercurial has had that from day one. You don't need bookmarks or any other extension for making branches, you just use the built-in commit command.

Mercurial has the exact same history model as Git, but in my opinion Mercurial comes with a better user interface.

Re:Git (4, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756754)

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".

Re:Git (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757290)

git is a command-line tool. The "visual apps" are add-ons that aren't even part of git proper. Basically, the GUI stuff for git sucks because no one with any expertise in git thinks they are necessary. As for the commands being unintuitive, they seem no more or less intuitive than those of svn or hg. I can't comment on perforce. That's not to say that one can use git very well if you don't know what you are doing, just "figuring it out as you go" as one might try out a different web browser. But I didn't find git to be very hard to learn.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757410)

git reset --soft HEAD^
WTF?

That means "Undo the last commit, but don't change my working copy or my staging area."

I've never used perforce, so I'll tell you what the subversion equivalent command is: There isn't one. You can't do that in svn[1].

Git is strictly more powerful than svn (and I presume p4), so of course you're going to be able to find examples of git commands that don't make any sense to someone who has only ever used cvs/svn/p4, in the same way as you can find svn commands that don't make any sense to someone who has only ever used rcs.

[1] Unless you're the admin, in which case the equivalent is going to be something something like "ssh host; kill apache and svnserve; svnadmin dump | head | svnadmin load; restart apache and svnserve; logout; ", and even then it's still not quite the same. The git user is probably trying to undo a local commit, not a remote one.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757800)

I have used git for approximately 3 weeks on 2 projects, and even I know what that command does. If you've never used git, of course it would be confusing. Just like I'm sure someone who has never used an Office product would wonder what the hell

File -> Save As ...

did.

Re:Git (2, Informative)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757834)

You should give Mercurial [selenic.com] a try. The thing that got me to use it in 2005, when it was pre-1.0, was how clean and obvious the command line interface was. I don't generally use graphical tools for development work, so I can't gauge the various GUIs available for it, but I do know that a lot of people like TortoiseHG [bitbucket.org] .

I've used Perforce as well, and it has its strange quirks and complexities too, though I agree that git's command line interface leaves a great deal to be desired in comparison. I think Mercurial's command line interface is more intuitive and clearer than Perforce's.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757862)

> git reset --soft HEAD^

Yet another priceless git command for when you really need just this type of rollback. Git makes perfect sense. If you really think git was not properly designed, then you don't understand it. It *is* hard to change how you think about working with your repo, but in git's case, you will come out at the other end way, way more productive.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33758150)

You're right.

It has an unintuitive set of commands, and various rudimentary, half-assed, poorly designed visual apps.

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

My guess is that you are not happy because you are using this command described to undo and correct a commit, instead of simply using "git commit --amend"?

Really, the command line is quite good. The command you listed is not some magical incantation for some common thing to do, but obviously it does a very specific thing for each of the flags given. Here, namely "reset/move the HEAD pointer but not the index or working tree (reset --soft) to the parent(^) of HEAD.

You could -in another situation- just as well decide to do "git reset HEAD^" or "git reset --hard HEAD~2" or "git reset --hard " or a large variety of other things.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756776)

git needs a new name. I suggest "fuck" or perhaps "gay".

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756822)

git needs a new name. I suggest "fuck" or perhaps "gay".

With the command "gay pull" and being able to announce that you're switching to gay, it's clearly a winner.

Re:Git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756788)

You should really take a look at SmartGit for Windows.

http://www.syntevo.com/smartgit/index.html

Aside from git on cygwin, it's a nice alternative.

Wow. (5, Insightful)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756338)

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?

Re:Wow. (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756394)

A side effect of think-aloud sleep-typing?

Nah, think-aloud sleep typing is more like

I, on the other hand, have found it quite impossible to predict orange growths with the kabbalah. Can you explain your methods and how I might improve mine?

Re:Wow. (2, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756514)

That makes a hell of a lot more sense than the article summary.

Re:Wow. (3, Insightful)

dncsky1530 (711564) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756398)

Yea I don't know what is going on today but the quality of many of these summaries has been awful. This one tops it off with numerous mistakes in the title alone.

I'm also not sure what Roblimo's problem with Atlassian or proprietary software is; from my experience Atlassian produces fairly good software and charges far less than competitors.

Also, how about linking to the actual press release [atlassian.com] or a news story [techcrunch.com] that contains more than commentary?

Re:Wow. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756422)

I can't understand what the article summary is getting at. A side effect of think-aloud sleep-typing?

I'd go with the sleep typing, but with the caveat that it's a brain-addled crack baby doing the sleep typing.

the majority of Atlassian's business comes from meeting the needs of behind-the-firewall, proprietary code repositories

That came straight out of Roblimo's crackpipe. So the majority of Atlassian's business comes from meeting the needs of proprietary code repositories? I didn't know that code repositories had needs, but I guess advanced ones like fanboy Roblimo's Git have gained sentience and are making demands, which Atlassian now makes the majority of its money from. By, uh... servicing the demands those repositories are making. Or... something.

Atlassian's cash cow has always been Jira, its bug tracker.

I think Roblimo's lost his marbles or something. The only point of this piece-o-shit article is to bash proprietary software and blow his FOSS horn out of his butthole like a Stallman-scented vuvuzela.

Re:Wow. (1)

kiwimate (458274) | more than 3 years ago | (#33762196)

Ah, I get it - I finally clicked on the first link, which goes straight to...an article written by one Mr. Roblimo. That article has a few [atlassian.com] more links (actually, apart from that one, the only other links are to Atlassian and Bitbucket). If I were a cynical type of chap, I'd suggest he's trying to pump up traffic to his page on this website and being too lazy to do it well.

Re:Wow. (4, Insightful)

kiwimate (458274) | more than 3 years ago | (#33759098)

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?

Re:Wow. (2, Insightful)

Callandor (823150) | more than 3 years ago | (#33759960)

If I had mod points, I'd mod this up. As a Mercurial user for over a year and a Bitbucket user for just under a year, I was very disappointed to read this story in my RSS. Not only is it old news (Bitbucket made this announcement on Tuesday), but it is full of inaccuracies and obviously written by a git fanboy. I've been using Jira and Confluence for several years now and I have no love for Atlassian and their products, but I don't hate them, either. At a glance, this announcement makes Bitbucket both better than it was and more attractive than GitHub. Maybe Atlassian will make some business decisions in the future that make Bitbucket less attractive, but for now, this is good news. There's no reason to be all negative about it, especially in the lead story. Troll is right.

This is a really really misinformed article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756342)

You should spend some more time researching prior to writing articles like this. Atlassian purchased Bitbucket, which is to Mercurial like GitHub is to Git. Mercurial is just as free (in both senses) as Git is...

Why does the fact Git is free matter here? (5, Informative)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756372)

Mercurial [selenic.com] is just as free, and just as easy to set up. Code hosting repositories are about someone else managing your connectivity, storage and backups for you, not about them building DVCS software for you.

Re:Why does the fact Git is free matter here? (3, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756392)

Yes.... and until there's a cheap hosting provider that offers WebDAV, Bitbucket is a good option. However, if you're an enterprise, such as a bank, you might be concerned about the risk of your code repository site getting hacked.... in that regard, Open Source projects are more amenable to services like this... at least until DVCS clients support host-proof encryption of files on the server.

OTOH they can offer web-based tools that make it easy to visualize changes and other things that would be a pain to setup.

Every minute you or people in your organization are dicking around with the DVCS and scripts on your PC that you're trying to use as an ad-hoc web server for code hosting, is a minute that you are not coding.

There's some value to having a code repository provider do all the heavy lifting.... just make sure you keep backups of your own.

Atlassian has some nice stuff (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756376)

I'd rather use the open source product every time but I have to admit Atlassian has some nice feature rich developer and development management tools.

JIRA's just so so and Confluence just plain sucks due to horrible Rich Text editing that destroys formatting and awful proprietary markup. (I have to use it every day. It's usable for quick notes. Anything bigger or with pics goes into a Word doc). However some of the JIRA plugins and especially their FIsheye product is awesome for code analysis and comparison (provided you have sensible management)

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757340)

Confluence uses pretty vanilla wiki text. The complete documentation for it is less than a page. Call me old school but I prefer wiki text.

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (1)

Syberz (1170343) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757386)

Lord do I ever feel your pain.

For project management, JIRA isn't half bad with a little tweaking (we have an excel doc plugged into it which graphs our sprint progress) but Confluence is utter crap. For a standard wiki, I suppose it's passable, but here we use it for our requirement management (unfortunately), maintaining traceability between reqs/tests is a nightmare...

I agree about Fisheye, it's the bee's knees.

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757964)

For a standard wiki, I suppose it's passable, but here we use it for our requirement management (unfortunately), maintaining traceability between reqs/tests is a nightmare...

And let me tell you, hitting myself on the head with a hammer did NOTHING to solve my headache - what an utterly crap tool!

If you use a tool for a purpose it wasn't really made for... is it the tool's fault that you have problems achieving that purpose? Or is it more an operator problem?

Seriously... a wiki for requirements? Good luck making sure that your devs don't just update the requirements to match current behavior and call it done, right?

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (1)

Syberz (1170343) | more than 3 years ago | (#33762254)

Before being a jackass, why don't you read the product's specs:

Requirements Gathering
A requirements specification is never complete. It is an iterative document showing only a team's intentions at a given point in time. Confluence gives development teams the flexibility to rapidly update specs and keep everyone updated as requirements change.

http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/tour/documentation-software.jsp [atlassian.com]

It was made for requirements, amongst other things. I didn't have the luxury of picking the tool and besides, except for Doors, I found no requirement management tool which answers all of our requirements neatly.

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (1)

metamatic (202216) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757472)

JIRA's just so so and Confluence just plain sucks due to horrible Rich Text editing that destroys formatting and awful proprietary markup.

Uh-huh...

(I have to use it every day. It's usable for quick notes. Anything bigger or with pics goes into a Word doc).

Hahahahahaha! Nice troll.

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757890)

How old are you? 3?

Re:Atlassian has some nice stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33758770)

Jira can require quite a bit of tuning to get running nicely, especially if you have thousands of users and over 100,000 tickets. The new AJAX stuff is slow and only works well in Chrome. Confluence's rich text editor has improved significantly over the last couple of years. The markup is the same as Jira's. Fisheye is awesome, I have a bunch of subversion repositories it talks to that are HUGE, and it makes dealing with those much easier. However, this may explain their half-hearted effort to integrate decent git support into Fisheye and Crucible.

Disclaimer: By Atlassian's admission, I run the largest private Jira and Confluence sites they know of.

Git lacks tracking capabilities (1, Interesting)

Florian Weimer (88405) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756412)

Developers can push arbitrary data and metadata into the repository. The standard server does not map branch updates to user accounts. Here's an example: Suppose developer A merges the master branch into a development branch (which is not ready for merging into the master). Git will record a merge commit, attributed to developer A. Developer B then accidentally pushes the development branch onto the master. This is now a fast-forward merge, so no additional commit will be created, and the mistake is not attributable to developer B (and it will look like developer A's mistake, because their commit will appear at the tip).

In some (mostly corporate?) environments, this can be a problem. This is something which can be fixed with additional bookkeeping on the server side and out-of-band user interface. I believe most of the Git hosting platforms out there have this functionality, and they keep it proprietary to them.

Re:Git lacks tracking capabilities (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756738)

Suppose developer A merges the master branch into a development branch (which is not ready for merging into the master).

Then why do it? He should clone the master branch and work with that. Branching in git is a non-issue, it's that cheap.

Developer B then accidentally pushes the development branch onto the master.

Which development branch? B's? You do realise that since git is distributed, A's and B's and the master upstream repositories are three completely distinct repositories.

Furthermore, there's a distinction (which you're not making) between the master branch in each of those repositories and the master repository (usually referred to as "origin", not "master", for this exact reason).

So, should B push changes to the dev branch to the upstream (origin) repository, it has nothing to do with what A has been doing in his own private repository in the meantime.

This is now a fast-forward merge, so no additional commit will be created, and the mistake is not attributable to developer B (and it will look like developer A's mistake, because their commit will appear at the tip).

First of all, non-fast-forward pushes are not allowed by default. You have to override and force the push manually. Which is frowned upon or downright forbidden (since it destroys history information on the recipient repository) and the consequences will range from a bop on the head to decapitation, depending on your project/workplace policies.

Second, I don't know of what VCS you are speaking, since you're obviously not familiar with git and/or have been using it in a very awkward setup. Basically, what you're describing is not a fault in git, just an very dumb usage scenario.

If you've managed to prove anything is that git is too flexible for its own good and that it can be misused in creative ways. :/

Re:Git lacks tracking capabilities (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756838)

Yes and no.

What he is describing is not how push is used/intended in a true distributed environment, however, in a corporate setting, you don't have a true distributed environment. You will have a centralized repository, which everyone will be pushing to (it's the one that's backed up).

As Git was intended for a pure distributed environment, push *is* lacking in a centralized environment. It's perfect for pushing things from your private repository to *your* public repository (the one one the web server). In a centralized environment, you lack the information that Florian complains about.

On further thought, I think the problem comes from the concept of each repository having *one* owner. Anything pulled into my repository, or pushed into my public repository, will have been pulled/pushed there by me. Who actually wrote the code is tracked by Git, but I'm the one who pulled it into my repository. A centralized repository doesn't fit into that concept.

However, there are hooks (shell scripts) that run every time someone pushes to the repository. These could be set up to log which commit ids were pushed by whom, but this will be outside of Git.

Re:Git lacks tracking capabilities (1)

FictionPimp (712802) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757534)

We use indefero with git. Basically we setup a project on the server. Each user has an account on indefero with their ssh key uploaded to it.

Then pull from there, do their work and push back when they are done. Works great and even allows nice workflows like this.

I have an intern, he checkouts from the server with read only permissions. He does his work and notifies me that he is done. I then pull from the server and do a checkout from him, validate his code and push it it to origin if it meets our standards.

Re:Git lacks tracking capabilities (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33758128)

If you use a DVCS like git in a corporate environment where all developers push to a central repo, you're doing it wrong. A DVCS allows you to use the exact same model as everything else in your organization: a chain of responsibility/authority that increases upwards and decreases downwards. Do all workers deal with the CEO? No, the entire organization is based on delegating responsibility and authority.

If you have 15 developers, split them into 3 teams, and choose team leaders.. Then choose a lead developer. The master repo is only ever updated by the lead developer (pushed by him), and his repo is updated from team leaders (pulled by him), and team leaders' repos are updated from team members (pulled by team leader). Each leader has the responsibility to ensure that their master branch is clean and correct for the boss.

Backup? Do not base your workflow model on the requirement of backup. Do not push your developers to commit changes to a central repo just because you want everything backed up. Make backups using a different mechanism.

Re:Git lacks tracking capabilities (1)

prlawrence (671855) | more than 3 years ago | (#33761034)

Suppose developer A merges the master branch into a development branch (which is not ready for merging into the master). Git will record a merge commit, attributed to developer A. Developer B then accidentally pushes the development branch onto the master. This is now a fast-forward merge, so no additional commit will be created, and the mistake is not attributable to developer B (and it will look like developer A's mistake, because their commit will appear at the tip).

We use git here in a corporate environment, and this problem absolutely does not happen, because:

  1. Only special people have commit rights to the official repo
  2. Those people always force a merge commit

Forcing a merge commit means using the --no-ff flag, which disallows any fast-forward merges. In this way, the person who is doing the merge into the official repository has a special merge commit with his name all over it.

This is not likely to be accidentally subverted; these official repo caretakers only use Git GUI (they're not really command-line types), and they use a git gui command I wrote for them that forces this behavior. Here it is, taken from .gitconfig:

[guitool "origin/pull merge request into local branch (Args = merge request number, Revision = local branch) "]
; fetch the latest from origin
; get off of the current local branch (in case it is the target)
; force the target local branch to match the origin branch it tracks
; checkout local target branch
; pull merge request into target local branch (and force merge commit)
cmd = git fetch origin && git checkout HEAD^ && git branch -f $REVISION origin/${REVISION} && git checkout $REVISION && git pull --no-ff origin refs/merge-requests/${ARGS}
argprompt = yes
revprompt = yes

If you're really paranoid about this, git offers pre-commit hooks, which could be used to reject any fast-forward merge into the master branch of the official repository.

At any rate, one would assume someone is ultimately responsible for checking official commits for their adherence to the no-fast-forward standard. If a bogus commit slips in it could always be redone, barring some ridiculous deployment system that rolls out production code instantly upon commit.

Nevermind that bitbucket competes with sourceforge (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756430)

Sf.net, which is owned by 'geeknet', which owns /. seems like the only reason this was posted despite the blatant fricking errors in it.

For the record, bitbucket is mercurial, not git. Although isn't it nice that crappy ass sf.net (which is in the same space as bitbucket although frankly sf.net still bloats goats) provides git..

I realize it's a bit tinfoil-y, but really, what other explanation is their for this postings content?

Re:Nevermind that bitbucket competes with sourcefo (1)

nOw2 (1531357) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756530)

I realize it's a bit tinfoil-y, but really, what other explanation is their for this postings content?

Head injury?
Everyone has a breaking point. For me and slashdot, it's this "article". I would vote it simply be removed and forgotten about.

That submission is just plain wrong (1)

denne (708170) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756450)

"the majority of Atlassian's business comes from meeting the needs of behind-the-firewall, proprietary code repositories"

Eh. Most products developed inhouse are hosted like that. No problem with that. Not every business want to do the "cloud-thing", but that could be illegal now?
And code repositories, most businesses uses svn, git or cvs, all of them are open source from what I know.

Has the cloud-hype been so successfull that people think that FOSS must be something in the cloud now?

Re:That submission is just plain wrong (1)

hrimhari (1241292) | more than 3 years ago | (#33758638)

And code repositories, most businesses uses svn, git or cvs, all of them are open source from what I know.

I regret to tell you that where I work we're forced to use MKS. But the development centers that know what version control is for end up using something else for the day-to-day work (like SVN) then exporting it off to MKS when the work is done, just to conform to Corporate rules.

Story is wrong...it's not a code repository (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756470)

Atlassian isn't a code repository, it integrates with them through a product called Fisheye. But their flagship product is Jira, an issue/project tracker. They also have an ldap server (Crowd), a wiki (Confluence), continuous integration (Bamboo), code review (Crucible) and more. It all works together quite well and is very flexible.

It's like Slashdot isn't even trying anymore.

Atlassian hosted repositories? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756660)

I didn't even know Atlassian hosted repositories (does anyone know what kind? I'm guessing subversion). In my mind, I'm more familiar with them as the guys that wrote the Confluence wiki & JIRA, two fairly nice tools.

Atlassian tools are not just a code repository (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756688)

It seems that nobody actually knows the Atlassian tools @/. .

Jira = Ticket Tracking
Best compared with redmine (http://www.redmine.org), but 100x more customizable. We are selling and customizing Atlassian Products in Austria and only ~50% of our customers usage is for software development. The extensive workflow engine in jira can be used to manage quite a lot businesses.

Confluence = Wiki/Blog
An enterprise wiki with integration with MS products.

Fisheye = Code Repository Viewer
Explores GIT, code repositories. So its not atlassian tools OR GIT as mentioned in the article but atlassian tools AND $CODE_REPOSITORY.

Crucible = Code Review Tool

Bamboo = Build Server

Crowd = SSO/OpenID tool
Has AD/LDAP integration

And last but not least you can use any of this tools standalone or a subset of them and use the extensive integration.

The tools are OpenSource but not "free" as in beer or any other way. As soon as you buy a license you have access to the code and can write your own plugins.

So please don't compare atlassian products with GIT anymore. Its like comparing to buy a whole car or just the wheels...
I'd be happy to hear about any other toolsuite with the same functionality as the atlassian tools.

Steak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33756702)

"Steak makes me orgasm." I swear, that's what she said.

kdawson, master of useless summaries (5, Interesting)

bigrat (25898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33756998)

Atlassian makes code tracking and corporate-friendly wiki products. They're pretty nice, actually. It's pretty easy to write plugins that add flexible functionality to their products. I was and am a pretty big fan of Jira and Confluence, and they're pretty responsive to their customers. Their products are (last I checked) pretty reasonably priced, and integrate into Subversion, CVS, and other source control products pretty easily - including Git.

Last I checked, Git didn't really lend itself to project issue tracking - which is what Jira does. So if you must bitch about non-free Jira, you could at least make an *intelligent* article comparison to a open-source issue-tracker like Trac (another excellent product).

Alas, we're unlikely to see any intelligent comparisons from kdawson. The "lazy-shrug" dept is all too relevant here, but not for the reasons kdawson used it.

Re:kdawson, master of useless summaries (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33758094)

Check again. They changed their pricing model recently. Now its unattractive for supporting customers as users.

Re:kdawson, master of useless summaries (2, Interesting)

bigrat (25898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33758506)

Also: way to change the article summary without an "Edit" notation, guys. That's awesome work, /. The summary is still incoherent.

roblimo a bit of an obnoxious git (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757142)

A bit sad that fanbois tend to have to spout their One True World View everywhere. Conveniently forgetting that if their pet system was truly the best of the best there simply would be no business case for any competitors. In reality such a situation would breed an unfortunate monoculture leaving us with a clunky beast and no improvements. Giving room to competitors. So, any large and widely used project needs a competitor or two to "stay humble", to keep each other on their toes, to avoid becoming complacent.

Besides, git isn't god. It has a couple of interesting differences over, say, svn, but its prime author is himself as obnoxious as the entire core team of svn. So STFU already and just give us the news, eh.

Don't forget github.com (2, Informative)

Ouija (93401) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757198)

You are remiss in not mentioning github.com [github.com] which does the favor of free, immediate online hosting of OSS projects and content under git. I don't know how many presenters I've seen with their slides and demo code all on github. It's the killer app that makes git really rock.

Ridiculous. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757202)

Can the entire post be marked as -1: Troll? That's the most ridiculous summary I've heard in probably years.

Congratulations on spewing garbage from your mouth, Roblimo. I heard that's a life skill when using GNU/Linux.

Wow. So many errors in such a short summary. (1)

affenhund (1371117) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757206)

And i'm not happy about them. If you don't even know the difference between mercurial and git, please just stfu.

FAIL (0, Redundant)

vr (9777) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757286)

Wow. That summary was amazingly bad. You fail the Internets, sir.

from the lazy-shrug dept (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33757302)

Atlassian Shrugged.

Last Straw (3, Insightful)

Seakip18 (1106315) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757520)

That's it. I'm doing what others have done and blocking kdawson. This summary is crap and should never have been posted.

OT: Isn't Atlassian Confluence a POS? (1)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757566)

I have to use it at work and it's a pain in the ass. The markup language is horrible, but it's a question of taste I guess. However some basic functions are missing; I couldn't find a way to list another user's contributions for instance. The ACL management is a pain in the ass. It lacks user-generated templates. The UI is rather bad.

Is there a good reason to pay that much money for such bad software?

Re:OT: Isn't Atlassian Confluence a POS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33758174)

JIRA does have some defects but it is usable.

Have you looked at their database design. Ugg, XML rather than relations.

Re:OT: Isn't Atlassian Confluence a POS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33759838)

The markup language is horrible, but it's a question of taste I guess. However some basic functions are missing; I couldn't find a way to list another user's contributions for instance.

I like the markup language in comparison to other's. Easy to understand and doesn't get in my way.

you are 100% correct on that missing feature, I can't understand who left that out. Frequently I know that a coworker edited a page but don't remember what it was called. Okay I'[ll look at their last edits. OH WAIT I CANT. And the search blows too.

Horrible Summary (2, Insightful)

Opusbloom (176861) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757632)

Wow, is there a prize for worst summary ever?

        "majority of Atlassian's business comes from ... proprietary code repositories
1. Atlassian doesn't have any products that are code repositories. It has one product that is a viewer for code repositories; Fisheye. It supports SSubversion, Perforce, CVS, CleareCase, Git and Mercurial.
2. I'm not privy to atlassian's financials, but I'm willing to bet that most of their money comes from Jira, with confluence a close second. Fisheye was an acquisition that they did a few years back when they bought Cenequa.

News for Nerds? More like Editorializing for Nerds.

People feel better about what they pay for. (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33757864)

Git is a much better SCM system then most of the thousand / million dollar systems out there. Currently I'm working perforce and I can tell you that it brings nothing to the table that I can't get with Git. When I told my prof we should just set up a Git server instead for free he made a big speech about not using Open Source. I can only imagine that his rejection is due to the fact that Open Source has been misrepresented and he fines it to lack features. As pure Linux user I can say with 100% confidence that open source projects are better then there closed source cousins, the only exception to this is highly specialized software such as autocad and similar special projects.

If you understand software then you'll understand that open source is the way to go, if you don't understand software or you've been brained wash by microsoft and apple then your going to shine towards using closed source software . If you want to spend a million to get the same function you can for free go ahead. I'll save my million and just use it to by I don't know maybe a house, car, food etc........ Open Source means better more secure software period!

Re:People feel better about what they pay for. (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33758062)

When I told my prof we should just set up a Git server instead

Thanks for this even-handed analysis, borne out of your long years of experience in the industry. It is clear that your vision and insight is hard-earned, and that you're not just parroting the standard slashdot groupthink in a karma whoring of immense proportions.

If you understand software then you'll understand that open source is the way to go,

Let's ask your prof if YOU understand software.

Open Source means better more secure software period!

Open Source is not magical pixie dust you can sprinkle on any project to turn it into a successful, well-designed software system. There are a lot of really great open source systems out there, and there are also a lot of steaming turds out there in the open source world - much like the closed source world, actually. It's simply a different development model, it does not automatically guarantee success, stability, or security.

Re:People feel better about what they pay for. (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33759348)

I don't need insight to know that perforce is a steaming turd. I've used both Git and Perforce and I will say for 100% that Git is much better SCM system. Not just because it's open source but because it actually accomplishes what were looking for which is SCM and not what we think we need such as SCM + extra's + interface = perforce.

Re:People feel better about what they pay for. (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33761154)

So you're saying that the feature set of a product is more important than how it was developed?

Color me shocked.

Piece of Sh%t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33760012)

Atlassian products are just more proprietary, buggy, bloatware. Whoever uses this crap is a moron. Are you listening MMSI?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>