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!

Linus Tries Out BitKeeper

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the shaking-up-the-betting-pool dept.

News 248

Flammon writes: "Linus has been overloaded with patches for a while and recently the issue started to become hot again. In an unprecedented move, Linus has started using BitKeeper, as reported by Linux Today. The benefits of BitKeeper are already showing from the large amount of detail provided in the latest unstable kernel pre-release." eirikref adds: "Read Linus' own statement and take a look at the BK web interface."

cancel ×

248 comments

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

Fist Sport!!! (-1)

CmderTaco (533794) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961109)

[goatse.cx]
2Lameness has filtered me!

1u
0cuiykmom
1d
7rirodfjm
3qxcjkc
2vzppdgld
2z
1uw
5qggql
6d
4isp
4pktjt
5nya
8i
4zcizhwd
7mtp
3gdcehmzg
7wlq
6cgnng
6dxtol
2bflpsaae
3oyfcnkzq
1zd
7kgihvo
7ktfipg
9mydqf
8fa
0mfsfxn
5zp
1vq
3qjxda
7urm
7uwys
8ejdtgfwc
1jxetz
1xqnmwjrl
6axpnd
0iw
1spsbd
1u
5diw
0gbq
5hsv
6onfl
4wago
5gbpwl
6xsdklg
7ruvkqram
2e
2vipmtsb
1sjjhwtv
0sftdfpho
2htgu
2vmrn
9zo
0qdahwhbo
9p
8fn
1iqgqw
9obbsz
0xzcutfm
6hoddzhr
1oztmhba
7xuloddtz
5elfdydi
5oaub
6v
9ikc
8on
5vozxu
3muwmiaw
2s
3ovkkic
9ddyamp
6alwmgk
6goxvkfyk
9w
3swewgj
6jwmfjf
2h
4mu
5dflfuw
2osneaomx
6nylomf
2pxglmu
7dv
1z
4ue
7sftxeoln
1uqguhs
5ezkn
5ivp
9mmbnrbh
2h
8ac
2np
5xw
1hshu
7pcyb
9zokvycxn
0ftbjvo
6lb
9fzbuvi
3p
8vrvfo
1wuphxmfq
7nxrl
4povo
7mnrofrq
2uawox
5hljkermx
3iwgfhpql
7ekfh
8tf
8r
5mbvugin
1csjrasx
9nz
6zknt
7xltzt
3rzk

Re:Fist Sport!!! (-1, Troll)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961128)

Damn you! A page-widening fr1st p0st!! Have you no respect for honest and legitimate Trolls like myself?

Re:Fist Sport!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961151)

you can neuter the page-widening effect (to read honest trolls in peace, natch) by setting something like this as your default style sheet:

BLOCKQUOTE { margin: 0.1em 0 }
BLOCKQUOTE { margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px }

Probably screws up some other stuff, but who's really lame enough to use BLOCKQUOTE anyway?

Re:Fist Sport!!! (-1)

neal n bob (531011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961207)

page-widdening has been defeated for logged in trolls:

go to preferences, set +1 bonus for long posts to 1, make cmdertaco your foe, and set your foes at -1, and finally set your browse level at 0 - result is that his posts will all go to -1; but all other worthy trolls will show up as 0 to you.

My friend (-1)

cmdr_shithead (527909) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961120)

hates police but wants to become a policeman.

If you are a member of the FOP, please follow this link [goatse.cx]

But surely (1, Flamebait)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961130)

Shouldn't Linus at least have tried out CVS first before moving to something exotic like Bitkeeper?

Re:But surely (2, Insightful)

AndroSyn (89960) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961141)

I believe Linus was pretty against CVS from day one. He didn't like it at all, and wasn't a terribly huge fan of BitKeeper either. It almost seems like he is using moreso because he has been prodded in all directions regarding this.

Re:But surely (3, Insightful)

Xzzy (111297) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961161)

Wouldn't you think that, in the 10 or so years he's been maintaining the kernel, he already evaluated it? Just because there was never a press release doesn't mean he rejected CVS out of hand and has never tinkered with it in his spare time.

Re:But surely (5, Insightful)

tftp (111690) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961211)

CVS is not as powerful as BK, and definitely not as scalable. It lacks very many key features; for example, it doesn't have native changesets, and they are essential when you work on a large project and accept lots of patches from lots of people.

I use CVS all the time, but I know its limitations. Linus was right when he decided not to use CVS, it simply is not reliable enough. But don't blame CVS, it is a good and useful tool; but every tool has its safe zone of "recommended use", and Linux kernel is way beyond that. I say, any project above 50 KLOCs and with 100 revisions on average would be pushing the limits.

Re:But surely (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961248)

The FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD projects seem to meet those criterion and are all using CVS. Sure there is stuff they wish they had, but they seem to do pretty well with CVS. Better IMNSHO than with out, very much so since I can get complete coppies of the Project repos.

Re:But surely (3, Interesting)

tftp (111690) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961288)

The *BSD projects seem to meet those criterion and are all using CVS.

That is fine; but the most important problems would be absence of changesets (so you can't undo related groups of patches), and absence of tiered repositories (everyone goes to the same, single, central CVS server). It all can work, and it does work as we know, but the more code you write the more difficult the maintenance becomes. Like it or not, CVS is an old software, unchanged for years and full of kludges, and BK is one of new designs.

Re:But surely (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961460)

If they started using a revision control system today do you think they would use CVS still? I highly doubt it.

Re:But surely (2, Interesting)

chenwah (161707) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961579)

Some of the newer 'out-of-tree' development that is going on in FreeBSD at the moment is being done using Perforce.

I think some of the SMPng and KSE work is in p4, for example.

Re:But surely (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961610)

For your information: criterion is singular, criteria is plural. Don't screw it up next time.

PPC Kernel (4, Informative)

NewbieSpaz (172080) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961131)

IIRC, the PPC Kernel is maintained through BitKeeper, and has been for quite some time.

Re:PPC Kernel (5, Informative)

NewbieSpaz (172080) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961139)

Here is some Info [penguinppc.org] on it...

Hmm... That guy looks familiar... (2, Offtopic)

darylp (41915) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961132)

I wonder if the nice people at Ask Jeeves [ask.com] are going to mind having their (presumably trademarked) logo swiped for this?

Re:Hmm... That guy looks familiar... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961143)

roftl!

Re:Hmm... That guy looks familiar... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961162)

ROFLAPMP

Re:Hmm... That guy looks familiar... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961182)

ROFLMAOAY

ROFLMAOPMP

Quick question ... (3, Funny)

Noryungi (70322) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961145)

Isn't BitKeeper a (gasp!) closed-source commercial software?

Shock! Horror! Has Linus Torvalds turned to the dark side of the code?!?!

Stay tuned for the next episode of ... TUX, Episode I: The revenge of the Borg!!

It's a floor wax and a dessert topping (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961208)

Bitkeeper is available under two licenses. The commercial license costs money and comes with support. The non-commercial license does not cost money., but it has a requirement that all your ChangeLogs must be sent to a world-readable server controlled by BitMover.

Bitkeeper source is available, but it's illegal to redistribute a version of Bitkeeper with the mandatory open logging stripped out.

Bitmover Inc. wants to avoid the situation where people use bitkeeper like gcc, taking free software tools but not giving anything back. You can pay Bitmover money, or you can use a free-as-in-beer version that is suitable for software libre and unsuitable for closed-source software.

crappy license (1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961240)

Bitmover has thow worst of both worlds, it gives you the source but you arent allowed to modify it to remove the one thing you dont want.

I think they did it just to annoy people.

Re:crappy license (-1)

IAgreeWithThisPost (550896) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961336)

what is so wrong with a company wanting to make money on their hard work? Dont you want to get paid at your job?
At least it's not completely closed source. Don't mock free, the alternative is NOT free.

Re:crappy license (3, Insightful)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961514)

Maybe they did it to force you to decide if you want to be part of the Free Software/Open Source community or not. It's annoying to me as well when I can't have my cake and eat it too, but I don't complain about the people that make cakes :)

It's just like the GPL - the license is a means to form and defend the community for the good of the community. If you don't like it, that's OK too, but don't say that those community-maintaining features are the problem. They're a feature, not a bug.

Re:It's a floor wax and a dessert topping (1, Offtopic)

SurfsUp (11523) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961249)

Bitkeeper is available under two licenses. The commercial license costs money and comes with support. The non-commercial license does not cost money., but it has a requirement that all your ChangeLogs must be sent to a world-readable server controlled by BitMover.

Bitkeeper source is available, but it's illegal to redistribute a version of Bitkeeper with the mandatory open logging stripped out.

Bitmover Inc. wants to avoid the situation where people use bitkeeper like gcc, taking free software tools but not giving anything back. You can pay Bitmover money, or you can use a free-as-in-beer version that is suitable for software libre and unsuitable for closed-source software.


Hi Larry ;-)

Re:It's a floor wax and a dessert topping (1)

Rooktoven (263454) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961501)

Great pie! And look at that shine!

Seriously, isn't this very much like what Trolltech is doing with QT?

Re:Quick question ... (4, Funny)

mons (124270) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961216)

If it is comercial, what is Jeeves doing on their web interface, he programmed it or something?

Maybe I should just ask him.

Re:Quick question ... (5, Insightful)

Komodo (7029) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961270)

(IANAL)

Well, Bitkeeper's license isn't GPL, nor do I think that it's been certified as an 'Open Source' license by Eric Raymond's definition. However, it's got some interesting features that are as interesting and powerful as the GPL, and that even work in the public interest.

You can get it for free (as in beer) and it says that it will revert to GPL if they go out of business (eg, their OpenLogging servers go down for more than 180 days)... which is an interesting clause that ensures that 'abandonware' becomes a public resource.

The one scary part is that you MUST submit metadata to their OpenLogging system, or pay money for a 'closed use' license. Now before you hurl, consider... all open source projects already have all their metadata (and all their source too!) out in the open!

Is this really so bad? People who don't want to share, have to pay... it sounds like it's punishing institutions that don't produce open source with Bitkeeper (individual use is exempt). Richard Stallman might be pleased!

Apart from that, the only other funny part of the license that I see, is you lose your license if you sue BitMover over intellectual property rights. I'm not sure what to make of that, I guess it's a way to cover their own butts. I'd be upset if Microsoft had it in their license, but here, it seems appropriate.

So while they aren't using the GPL or a BSD license or the Artistic license or any other common, popular OSS license, they ARE going out of their way to work with developers and users instead of exploiting them. That's a far cry from Microsoft or even 'linux-friendly' software companies like Oracle. They've found (even more) ways to write software and work with the public, without giving away the shop.

I'd say, on the whole, two thumbs up.

Doncha just love hypocrites? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961525)

"I'd be upset if Microsoft had it in their license, but here, it seems appropriate. "

If Microsoft promised to refund your money within 30 days if you were unsatisfied with the product you would be whining that it wasn't 45 days.

Keep the terse changelogs (3, Insightful)

reaper20 (23396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961146)

Methinks that it wouldn't be trivial to continue to pipe the results in a terse format as well.

For L-K and releases a terse format is appropriate, but I think that keeping the longer ones around somewhere can help some of us newbies understand what the heck is going on in there.

Re:Keep the terse changelogs (3, Informative)

reaper20 (23396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961157)

Looks like I spoke to soon, looks like they will be maintained at http://linux.bkbits.net

Linus not getting enough respect (2, Offtopic)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961164)

It's high time he told the community to screw off for a bit.

It's his friggin' hobby, after all. If people don't like the way he deals with it, maybe they ought to go work for a more personable coder on another OS, like, say, Theo De Raadt.

Scary thought, hey?

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (1)

pnelynx (120133) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961176)

Which OS is Theo de Raadt's?

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (-1)

ReluctantBadger (550830) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961181)

OpenBSD!!!!! [openbsd.org]

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (1)

Shadowlion (18254) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961187)

OpenBSD.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (0, Offtopic)

hardcode (105714) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961195)

OpenBSD http://www.openbsd.org

stfw (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961296)

search the frickin' web

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (5, Funny)

Stochi (114270) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961203)

personable? Theo? Good God! he's like a living godzilla spewing white hot embers of death everywhere...

not that i don't love the OpenBSD project (i have several machines running it), but to say that Theo is personable is like saying everyone needs a porcupine to snuggle up with at night.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961234)

psst ... turn on the sarcasm detector!

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961236)

That was the poster's point, Stochi. Let me freshen up that coffee of yours.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961421)

"to say that Theo is personable is like saying everyone needs a porcupine to snuggle up with at night."

Please don't trash our friends the porcupines.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961222)

It's not a hobby when you get paid to do it. It's part of his job, and I'm glad to see he's finally realizing that his old method of patching doesn't work anymore. Thanks Linus!

posting anonymously because slashdot editors have made it clear they don't tolerate dissent.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961475)

Linux is only half his job at Transmeta, the other half he is doing development of their closed source software CPU emulaition thingie.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (2, Insightful)

srealm (157581) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961329)

As soon as Linux started getting used by as many people as it is now, and started gaining momentum and more developers writing drivers, features, patches, etc -- Linux ceased having the luxury of it being just a hobby -- now he has dependants.

I agree, he deserves respect, however the linux user and open source community cant afford to just wait until Linux gets around to reviewing everything and decides to put it in at his leasure anymore. The patches, new features, and demand is too great.

Its about time Linus got some kind of source control - however I DID note that the only one who has access to it is Linux himself, which doesnt exactly make it helpful ... however I'm hoping that will eventually change, and we might actually end up with a group of people 'blessed' enough to review patches and put them in (ie. the 'all-stars' you see in every changelog), and a much faster moving patch and update scheme.

Heres hoping ...

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (1)

srealm (157581) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961351)

Before anyone decides to flame, scrap that 'linux is only one who has access' comment, I was looking at the wrong branch of code.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (4, Interesting)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961363)

"It's his friggin' hobby, after all. If people don't like the way he deals with it, maybe they ought to go work for a more personable coder on another OS, like, say, Theo De Raadt."

Um, except that NOBODY WORKS FOR LINUS! Linux isn't Linus's ball anymore to take away when he doesn't like how people are playing the game. That said, I think he's been a wonderful leader and manager, and is obviously opening up to suggestions. But it is stupid and insulting to say that people who aren't satisfied with Linus's management should just suck it and pick another OS. Linus himself would tell you that Linux is more the community's than his.

Re:Linus not getting enough respect (3, Interesting)

mark_lybarger (199098) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961429)

There's a point where a kernel development becomes a little more than a hobby. I would have to say Linus has crossed that line long ago. He may or may not recieve DIRECT monetary incentives to keep up the good work, but regardless, the line is crossed. It's now a profession. Linus is a professional Linux developer. Until he takes a professional position that does not allow him to spend as much time on kernel development, it's his profession, and as such no longer a hobby.

How utterly wonderful. (-1, Troll)

ReluctantBadger (550830) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961166)

Recipe for disaster. Take one part naff operating system (Linux), blend in a handful of unwashed geeks (Slashbots), add a pinch of bad code management (Bitkeeper) and smother generously with a wannabe-deity (Linus). Result : An even worse "open source" offering for the corporate computing environment.

BitKeeper??? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961175)

Why would somebody choose BitKeeper over Perforce? Perforce offers free licenses for Open Source software and is IMHO 1000% better and more powerful than CVS. Anybody wants to clarify what makes BitKeeper the tool of choice?

BitKeeper gives you the answer: (4, Informative)

Otis_INF (130595) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961258)

http://bitkeeper.com/Products.Comparisons.Perforce .html [bitkeeper.com]

Allthough this is marketing poop so it should be taken with a fine grain of salt, it might answer your question.

Re:BitKeeper gives you the answer: (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961541)

The BK site seems to be unavailable now (wonder why?) so I can't check the revision date on that page, but I can tell you that a friend of mine who knows Perforce and CVS and Clearcase and a bunch of other revision control systems wrote the BK guy and disagreed with more than half of the stuff on that page.

He got a fairly unprofessional response.

I've used Sun's source control tool, and it was so awful that I've wiped its name from my memory. It locks the entire repository to do anything! So updating a source tree over an ISDN line (which took about 40 minutes where I was working) prevents anyone else from checking anything in until you're done. That doesn't save much time, let me tell you, and it really pissed off the other developers.

And guess what, the BK guy wrote that too, and thinks the locking is a feature.

Maybe that's changed by now. Check it out, but watch for 'features' like this one.

change (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961184)

I don't know if it's a good thing linus is changing how he works. If in the end it helps him become more productive, than great. If this ends up wasting tons of time and make him less productive overall, than he should tell people to take a long walk off a short bridge. Here's to hoping using source control leads to higher productivity. Not everyone works well with source control, so chances of it succeeding is 50/50.

Re:change (1)

Ignominious Cow Herd (540061) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961638)

OT Warning That's pier, not bridge. A long walk off a short bridge puts you on the other side of the river or whatever. Clearly, Linus' personality is strong enough that he will tell everyone to go screw if he finds that BK isn't cutting it for him. I'm guessing that he has agreed that there is a problem. I applaud the idea that he is trying this despite his long and loud protests in the past.

Which is Best? (4, Funny)

4of12 (97621) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961185)

Now I'm confused!

I've been using CVS [cvshome.org] for years and read with great interest the recent Linux Journal article [linuxjournal.com] about the Subversion [tigris.org] project to created a CVS replacement that is better than CVS.

Then I see a Slashdot story [slashdot.org] about arch [regexps.com] .

Now, my FearLessLeader starts using Bitkeeper [bitkeeper.com] .

Should I move from CVS and, if so, which is best?

Re:Which is Best? (3, Insightful)

banky (9941) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961206)

There is no need to be confused.

If CVS works for you, and you have no complaints or issues, then don't switch.

If you find yourself 1)wanting features, 2)overwhelmed by inadequacies, or 3)working too hard to accomplish default behavior in other systems (ex scripting what is handled automagically in others), then investigate changing.

Re:Which is Best? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961219)

Why don't you decide for yourself what needs you have and which product best fullfills that need before you start blindly following others?

Think for yourself, man!

Re:Which is Best? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961604)

CVS has a lot of limitations. I use it but I still take a look at replacements.

Subversion is not yet finished.

I have never heard about arch before and it seems there is a long way before this tool until it is really useful.

ChangeLog detail (2, Insightful)

Mattygfunk (517948) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961191)

It's interesting to note that Linus feels the ChangeLog for the 2.5.4-pre1 kernel is too detailed.

Can it really be a bad thing to have too much information about any changes?

Re:ChangeLog detail (1)

h2odragon (6908) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961217)

"yes", probably.

However, it should offer a taste of what he actually does to those who haven't a clue and yet feel free to explain at great length to the world how he could do it better.

Re:ChangeLog detail (3, Insightful)

rlowe69 (74867) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961253)

Can it really be a bad thing to have too much information about any changes?

Yes, when the information is so detailed that you can't cut through the BS to find the meat. Some people just want a brief list to skim in order to decide if it's worth downloading or not.

The most important point here is.. (1, Offtopic)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961193)

Linux uses pine! Look at the selm tag!


Pine.LNX.4.31.0202051928330.2375-100000


Re:The most important point here is.. (2)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961232)

Gee, that's an old pine, must be one of the old giants at yellowsnow park.. how can we trust the creator of our shiny new kernels if his MUA is years old?

-- TeknoHog (Pine.LNX.4.44)

Re:The most important point here is.. (3, Insightful)

tftp (111690) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961247)

Pine.LNX.4.31.0202051928330.2375-100000

Well, at least he runs Linux...

Re:The most important point here is.. (1)

WeedMonkey (323943) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961291)

If he didn't, he'd be in trouble round here. "I don't care *who* he is, if he's not using Linux, his opinion doesn't count".

I feel better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961278)

I still use it, too. That and Mozilla mail.

Is Linus still working at transmeta ? (2, Troll)

CDWert (450988) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961204)

How much time does Linus have to dedicate to all these patches that get submitted ?

Would a seperate fork, with sections maintained by indiviudal groups be best ? 4 or 5 guys in charge of VM, 4 or 5 guys in charge of Hardware, they would only be responsible for review and merging.

I know ill get blasted for fork speak, but sometimes its a good thing, (While youre at it optimize for the x86...lol)

Linus is the all benevolent creator and Linux god granted, respect is due, We however are the users, the ones in need, Linux was intended to fill this need, if it reaches a point because of whatever reason, perhaps a branching, is best for it as a whole. I dont think anyone actually asked Linus if he wanted the development to consume his life (Maybe he does, I dont know, it dosent matter)

All this is an awful lot to ask of any one man, mortal or not. Perhaps Linus would welcome this as an oppurtunity to do other things.

I hope this will make Linus's life easier, Sometimes people continue on a path out of a feeling of obligation, does Linus do this now because, 1 He wants to, 2 He feels like he has to
3 Nobody else has stepped up to offer a solution.

Re:Is Linus still working at transmeta ? (2, Informative)

gmack (197796) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961341)

There are seperate forks: 2.2.x and 2.4.x. Neither are maintained by Linus.

he changed his mind? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961210)

I am not following the lkml so I wonder when Linus changed his mind? Didnt he say that everybody should send patches to maintainers and stop bothering him?

Re:he changed his mind? (2)

RatFink100 (189508) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961313)

I don't follow it (that closely) either but it seems like you're talking about 2 different, though related, things.

There's the process of patch submissiong which is pretty much the same - send them to the maintainers, who are supposed to send them to the 'trusted few', who send them to Linus. Some of the recent discussion seems to be over the fact that the maintainers thought they had a direct line to Linus, whilst he didn't see it that way.

Then there's the tool Linus uses to organize his source tree(s). This will allow Linus to speed up the process of applying and testing patches. It will not change the protocol for submitting patches. Maybe he'll give the trusted ones write permissions if they even decide to adopt BK too.

At least that's my impression - I could be, and usually am, wrong :)

NOS! (-1, Offtopic)

RICE_BOY_TYPE_R (556842) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961221)

Linus doesn't need bitkeeper,

He needs NOS on his stylish Saab!
that way he would spend less time commuting to his stupid job at suckmeta and spend more time on his hot wife, and on the kernel.

I modded my Cavalier Type-R to get me to work 85% faster so i could spend more time on ebay looking for mods. Bling!Bling!

Linus flakes again (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961228)

Ever notice this guy walks around all day w/ an attitude like "If you don't like it, shove it!"? remember the "I'm a bastard" [insecure.org] thread about a kernel debugger ? here is the guy who said (in the same thread) "I can say 'I don't care' with a straight face, and really mean it" yet whenever the community and press get on his case about something like the 2.4 kernel being vaporware or about his unwillingness to create a patch management system, he gives in. so much for mister tuff guy.

"it's my kernel and I'll cry if I want to" - Linus

Posted anonymously to protect me from Slashdot Linux Nazis

Linux kernel uses source control (5, Funny)

leshert (40509) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961260)

In other news, demons all over Hell were seen lacing up their skates for the upcoming hockey match against the U.S. National team.

Perhaps we should investigate the latest scam? (-1, Offtopic)

Benjiman McFree (321140) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961261)

A few years ago the government convienently yanked energy out of the cpi. Does anyone find any possible correlation between this enron scam and this prior government action?

--Why ask why is a recipe for explotation

Irony (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961300)

Maybe I'm wrong ... but isn't it ironic that Linus + Linux, the ultimate of Open-Source development is using Commercial software for their development?

~confused

2.4 and general kernel development (1)

Dacmot (266348) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961308)

On the BitKeeper website, they aslo say that 2.4 (as well as 2.5) is hosted by BitKeeper.

Seems to me like a good idea to speed up the kernel development pace while still keeping control. And it seems to make Linus happy :o) Looks like he's having fun playing with it.

-Dacmot

I think Arch would be better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961321)

For much of the same reasons it is better than
Subversion:


http://www.regexps.com/src/src/arch/=FAQS/subver si on

Re:I think Arch would be better (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961339)

/. inserted a space into the URL for some reason.
Here it is again:


"http://www.regexps.com/src/src/arch/=FAQS/subve rs ion"

Hmm, /. is still inserting the space in "subversion".
Strange...even placing it in quotes didn't help
in the URL.?

Re:I think Arch would be better (1)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961539)

/. inserts a space in any string over a certain size to prevent attacks where someone posts a huge string and forces the display to be a mile wide.

If you make the URL a link like this [regexps.com] (which is common courtesy anyway) then /. doesn't break the URL.

In other news... (-1, Offtopic)

BRO_HAM (543601) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961324)

In other news Ladies and Gentlemen - it has been reported that Linus has been seen wiping his ass with kleenex instead of toilet paper. You heard it here first.

Seriously, Linus has been exploited so bad by his very own community, that he almost stands as a pop-star rather than an OS hacker. /me shuts up now.

The next step? (2, Funny)

Kopretinka (97408) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961331)

So soon we'll start hearing that BitKeeper doesn't scale, right?8-)

Oh no! (3, Funny)

L3WKW4RM (228924) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961355)

Hopefully they don't keep the repository on the same machine that hosts their website...

We may have /.'ed the kernel!

Detail in changelog (3, Redundant)

srealm (157581) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961380)

I must say, I *LIKE* all the detail in the changelog now. For a LONG time, I've thought the changelogs for linux have been too understated.

'More bug fixes for PCMCIA' or 'Patches for USB'. Doesnt really tell me if theres any hope a particular problem I am experiencing with either has been fixed -- nor does it tell me why something that used to work no longer works, and how to re-enable the 'old style' code -- or where I should look for the diff to say to the author "This used to work, since this change, it doesnt anymore ... X hardware, X version, etc"

More detail means, for example, I can see from the changelog, when the USB sleep (ie. usb does not come back online automatically when you put your computer sleep, you must either do some fancy footwork beforehand (which doesnt always work), or reboot). Its a known problem, but "More USB bugfixes" doesnt tell me its fixed, or even that that part of the code has been worked on.

I'm sure theres many others out there who experience problems in specific parts of the code, (which are known problems), and have been frustrated by the changelog's lack of detail -- and dont want to upgrade your kernel to 2.5, or 2.4-pre's or even another stable 2.4, unless you know your problem is fixed, because what you got now works for everything ELSE, and you never know what a new kernel will break. I myself havnt started using 2.5 kernels, but I would probably start IF I could tell by the changelog, that my problem was solved there, so there was some benefit for me.

You fool... (2, Troll)

rho (6063) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961596)

/* you are not expected to understand this */

Downloading bitkeeper (2)

heroine (1220) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961414)

Signing up for the mailing list in order to gain access to the bitkeeper download can be a bitch.

Free vs. Open Source positions (3, Insightful)

Lumpish Scholar (17107) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961436)

The Free Software movement says, "Use the software that's the most free. If you still have a choice, use the best software."

The Open Source Software movement says, "Use the best software. That will often be Free / Open Source software."

I know it's off topic... but I gotta know (-1, Offtopic)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961480)

Why does all this extraneous crap like USB drivers get tossed into the Linux kernel? Why can't the kernel just do the important things, like supporting virtualization of the processor, at let device drivers do all the dirty work?

--Mike--

Re:I know it's off topic... but I gotta know (2, Informative)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961531)

Drivers are distributed with the kernel for two reasons:

  • It's convenient for users to get it all in one package
  • It's convenient for developers to keep it all together so that if the core interfaces change, the driver change will happen quickly.

The USB drivers aren't overly entangled with the real innards of the kernel, they just happen to be shipped in the same tarball.

Bad news (1, Troll)

AirLace (86148) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961488)

It's somewhat sad that Linux, which has often been referred to as the pearl of Free Software, will now be developed using non-free software.

One of the immediate consequences I can see from this move is that Debian users will no longer be able to participate in active (ie. more than just sending in patches) kernel development, as Debian policy states that Debian can only include Free Software. Of course, they can install the proprietary BitKeeper from an unoffical non-free apt source, but I doubt most Debian users will be willing to do this. Judging by what I've seen, several leading kernel developers, notably Ben Collins, are Debian users. A resolution must be found to this problem, even if it involves one of the bigger companies purchasing BitMover just to set the code free. In the long term, judging by the fervent vigilance of the Free Software community, I could forsee that this could be a very nice excuse for a fork of the Linux kernel which will be developed using Free Software only, such as CVS.
Of course, there's also the "laughing stock" factor. Whilst it may not be so bad for the Linux community, the Free Software community (if they can be set apart) will have less to be proud about when it comes to the kernel.
For sure, this has made kernel development somewhat less accessible to a large group of Linux users. I've always believed that revision control could help Linus, but surely the Free Software community has something at least as good as, if not better than the propretary offerings? Otherwise, we're no better off than using Microsoft SourceSafe.
Slashdotters should know better than most the difference between free beer and free speech.

Re:Bad news (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2961516)

Just because BitKeeper isn't "Open Source(tm)" or "Free/Libre via GPL(tm)", doesn't mean it isn't free software. You can still get the source and develop free software with it.

Re:Bad news (1)

josh crawley (537561) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961633)

OH NO!! We're using NON-FREE software in our Kernel project!

I'll take the "public Humilation" by using a kernel produced by what seems a better way of maintaining patches. If that means the linux compiles crash less ( usually due to me not finding THAT correct patch), I don't care. And to address those debian people: If you want to break off the rest of the crowd, go ahead. Just don't come crawling back when you go the way of FreeBSD.

The only "laughing stock" is you rambling on how this will destroy the linux community..

Josh Crawley

Re:Bad news (1)

josh crawley (537561) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961651)

"If that means the linux compiles crash less ( usually due to me not finding THAT correct patch), I don't care."

I meant Linux Kernel compiles. If I didn't fix my little mistake, some anonycoward would jeer at me.

Josh Crawley

Re:Bad news (5, Insightful)

elandal (9242) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961644)

How does Linus using BitKeeper make kernel development harder for those who don't have it (can't afford, won't use non-free software, whatever)?
Linus and the maintainers will still accept patches in email, so nothing's changed except Linus now has a tool that is likely to help him keep up the extremely high productivity.

And, using non-free software to manage the development of free software doesn't make the free software any less free. It's not like it could only be compiled by a non-free compiler.

Maybe this means that those who write free software will next write a tool even better than BitKeeper and the world will be once more a little better place.

The devil must have had to put on a sweater (5, Insightful)

buckrogers (136562) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961502)

I am very thankful that Linus finally "saw the light" and started using a source code control system.

I really like the new change logs, I have always hated the old change logs as being too uninformative. One of the really interesting things for me about a source code control system is that it preserves a lot more of the history of the source code than the tar balls do.

It is also really cool how it branches the source for every patch and checks in the code with the users name as the one who checked it in and the body of the email as the comment. If Linus can find a way to also check in his rejected comments on a patch then that will also be very useful. It would be interesting to capture a little bit of the why instead of just the how in the kernel development process.

To apply a patch you just have to merge the branch that contains the patch back into the main development branch, fix any conflicts, compile, fix it so it works right and then commit. :)

And Linus will never lose another patch again, they will be saved for all time in the source tree under a seperate branch.

Once Linux lets his inner sanctum of kernel developers all start merging approved patches into his main branch then we will see the kernel development really speed up.

Thanks!

Alan Thicke. DEAD. (-1)

Alan_Thicke (553655) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961515)

I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found dead in his home this morning. Even if you never watched his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon.
He will be missed :(



Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):

Show me that smile again.
Ooh show me that smile.
Don't waste another minute on your crying.
We're nowhere near the end.
We're nowhere near.
The best is ready to begin.

As long as we got each other [slashdot.org]
We got the world
Sitting right in our hands.
Baby rain or shine;
All the time.
We got each other
Sharing the laughter and love.

architecture problem, not SCM problem (4, Interesting)

markj02 (544487) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961548)

The problem with Linus getting overloaded is not a problem with SCM, it's a problem with the Linux kernel itself: too many kernel enhancements and bug fixes (apparently) require patches all over the kernel. What we really need is a more flexible way for extensions to hook into the kernel and override existing kernel functionality.

There are lots of ways of providing such hooks. Perhaps the most compatible with the Linux kernel mindset would be something similar to Emacs-hooks: replace most kernel functions with variables holding function pointers to the actual code and provide APIs for manipulating those hooks.

structures: Cathedral, Congregation, Cell (1)

kurisudes (258390) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961553)

When I think about the orginizational movements and changes that are going on in the kernel developor I can't help but feel a similarity to the orginizational transformations within various parts of the Christian church... I mean the word catherdral which all understand as being that a small closed group are speaking and therefore are being heard well. The next step congregation (or bazaar if you prefer) is many people being opened to speaking but with no way for all of them to be heard well and so many get lost without a minister (maintainer) to listen to them, which results in people losing personal care and leaving the project. The next step which some churches have moved to is the cell model.

In this model there are many small groups (trees) within the church and everyone is part of one. These small groups are miniature churches that do all the things that a large size church does and when they get too large to incorporate everybody they split into two groups. They also come together in a larger community where the things the small groups do are brought together with common vision and direction. Under this model, all speak and all are heard. Nobody is lost and all ideas etc. can become part of the whole.

I think Linus is moving towards this whether he knows it or not. He already recommends the different trees to develop and people to become a part of a smaller network of maintainers etc. that pass on to other developers until it reaches him.

Wanting to be different? (1)

RinkSpringer (518787) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961556)

Whoa, this is the first time I've ever heard of Bitkeeper... I do use a lot of open-source software, and this is the first time the name Bitkeeper came up...

Is it just me or does it look like they want to show once again that Linux is different from all other projects?

I mean Linus is still in charge of Linux... and now, he uses some exotic software program which now suddently everyone hears of. I wish my company made that program, that'd get me some licenses! :)

"A Critique of the BitKeeper License" by Jack Moff (5, Informative)

CondeZer0 (158969) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961586)

I found very interesting a document from Jack Moffitt (of xiph.org [xiph.org] fame,
one of the main Ogg developers and one of the Icecast Core Developers [icecast.org] ),
about some problems he had with the BK license when he was using it
for hosting Icecast:

"A Critique of the BitKeeper License" [mit.edu]
http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/user/x/i/xiphmont/Pu blic/critique.html


You might also find interesting his post on the matter to the
"Icecast Developer Discussion List":

http://www.xiph.org/archives/icecast-dev/0067.html [xiph.org]

I hope that he will post here his his experience using BK
in an Open/Free-source project...

Best regards

\\Uriel



P.S.: Yea, I know I'm karma whoring, but I'm sure many people will find this interesting,
specially in casse Jack dont post to this history latter

No free alternatives? (4, Interesting)

leandrod (17766) | more than 12 years ago | (#2961661)

I did a superficial investigation on source control systems, and found some very interesting really free ones, like Aægis [aegis.sf.net] .

Does someone know if free alternatives to BK were considered, and if so why a semi-free one was choosen? If BK was better, specifically how it compared to Aægis and other alternatives?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?