Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Torvalds Unveils New Linux Control System

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the that-was-quick dept.

Software 527

BlakeCaldwell writes "CNet reports: 'Linux founder and leader Linus Torvalds has launched a new tool, called Git, to manage his software project, after a dispute led him to drop the previous system.' He will start using Git instead of BitKeeper to control the flow of updates and track changes in the kernel." We've covered this previously. Relatedly, ChocLinux writes "Jeremy Allison, who wrote Samba with Andrew 'Tridge' Tridgell, is sticking up for his friend in the row over BitKeeper. "

cancel ×

527 comments

Props to GNAA. (-1, Flamebait)

Slutware (877826) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301597)

#buttes sucks Linus Torvalds' cock.

Re:Props to GNAA. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301655)

#dongs > #buttes

Nice Timing! (0, Redundant)

MrRTFM (740877) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301600)

What do you mean - covered this previously - have you looked at the current poll [slashdot.org] ?
The timing looks a bit strange - did the editors have inside knowledge, or is the poll guy trying to see if slashdotters can predict the future?

Re:Nice Timing! (2, Funny)

PhuckFonix (788199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301627)

This is a total shock for me. I thought for sure he was going back to pen and paper.

Re:Nice Timing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301637)

Nah, Git wasn't an option after all. ;-)

Re:Nice Timing! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301648)

I think Mind Melding is closed source.

Re:Nice Timing! (5, Informative)

jdmetz (802257) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301652)

If you follow the Linux Kernel mailing list at all, it has been fairly apparent for the past week at least that Linus would be using "git" to manage the kernel. He has been putting a lot of time into it. So, my guess is, yes - the editors had "inside" knowledge

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301603)

fp niggaz

Newsflash! (1, Informative)

starmang (661689) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301607)

Slashdot is about a week behind! Ever hear of kerneltrap.org? *sigh*

Re:Newsflash! (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301676)

GIT is under active development and the fact that exist doesn't mean it will be the "definitive" tool, althought it will probably do. I think it can be considered a "0.1 version". There has not been "official release" of git, they're just testing it

how come (2, Insightful)

phreakv6 (760152) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301609)

how come this wasnt even an option in the current poll here. let the replies like "welcome to /. flow"

Re:how come (4, Insightful)

wed128 (722152) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301630)

it was. It was called "home grown solution"

Re:how come (2, Funny)

dragon_imp (685750) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301643)

And the poll's still up! I am psychic -- I voted for homegrown. You can, too.

Re:how come (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301688)

welcome to /.

(sorry, had to be said)

Git? (4, Interesting)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301611)

Isn't that a bit of a disparaging name in English as it is spoken in the Olde Country?

As in "You daft git!"

Re:Git? (3, Funny)

0x461FAB0BD7D2 (812236) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301632)

Linus got the name from Tridge's response to McVoy.

Re:Git? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301680)

Oooh, would you do me the honour and do the same for me, you cunt punching pope felcher?

Re:Git? (5, Informative)

PeterBrett (780946) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301642)

Yes, that's right; from the git README [ehlo.org] :

"git" can mean anything, depending on your mood.

- random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not
actually used by any common UNIX command. The fact that it is a
mispronounciation of "get" may or may not be relevant.
- stupid. contemptible and despicable. simple. Take your pick from the
dictionary of slang.
- "global information tracker": you're in a good mood, and it actually
works for you. Angels sing, and a light suddenly fills the room.
- "goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks

Re:Git? (5, Informative)

Saunalainen (627977) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301646)

Indeed - Linus has already explained [idg.com.au] the reasoning behind this name.

Re:Git? (5, Funny)

Striikerr (798526) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301799)

And if you're too lazy to RTF, here's the quote from the very end of the article.. "When asked why he called the new software, "git," British slang meaning "a rotten person," he said. "I'm an egotistical bastard, so I name all my projects after myself. First Linux, now git.""

Re:Git? (1)

StrawberryFrog (67065) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301672)

Isn't that a bit of a disparaging name in English as it is spoken in the Olde Country?

Yes.

Linus using it despite/becuase of this is typical of his sense of humour. From TFA:
Torvalds recognizes Git isn't flawless: "I'm proud of Git, but let's face it, it definitely has some rough edges.

Re:Git? (4, Informative)

Arathrael (742381) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301673)

It sure is, I believe it's derived from the Scottish term get, usually used to refer to an illegitimate child. 'Git' itself is used more broadly though, in much the same way as 'bastard' is.

Re:Git? (2, Funny)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301740)

that's what we appalachains holler at city slickers that'ar trespassing, usually spoken while holding a shotgun.

Somewhere between bastard and son of a bitch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301768)

Isn't that a bit of a disparaging name in English...?

It definitely is an odd name for the tool, and while I don't mind one bit, it won't do the community any favors.

The most relevant storyline seems to be:

When asked why he called the new software, "git," British slang meaning "a rotten person," he said. "I'm an egotistical bastard, so I name all my projects after myself. First Linux, now git."

Be that as it may, the use of the term varies widely, and when used with particular entonations extends right up to words and phrases containing lots of F's and C's.

I don't think this really helps.

Re:Somewhere between bastard and son of a bitch (1)

Denyer (717613) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301853)

Be that as it may, the use of the term varies widely, and when used with particular entonations extends right up to words and phrases containing lots of F's and C's.

As far as I'm aware, the term isn't in common usage in the US, and in the UK and Australia certainly has nothing like the connotations of 'fucking cunt'.

git in UrbanDictionary (1)

Fossilet (735452) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301828)

1. A completely ignorant, childish person with no manners.
2. A person who feels justified in their callow behaviour.
3. A pubescent kid who thinks it's totally cool to act like a moron on the internet, only because no one can actually reach through the screen and punch their lights out.
That n00b is behaving like a bloody git. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=git &f=1 [urbandictionary.com]

zdnet.co.uk (5, Informative)

fish34 (636162) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301612)

What an awful zdnet article, "But now it seems that some open source developers haven't kept up their end of the bargain. " Tridge wasn't bound the by the license. "Tridgell's decision to reverse-engineering Bitkeeper. The resulting clone would violate BitMover's intellectual property -- something McVoy wasn't going to sit back and watch happen." Again, no, it wouldn't. My understanding is that reverse engineering for interoperability is legally fine. Think of Samba..

Re:zdnet.co.uk (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301713)

Tridge didn't even reverse engineer Bitkeeper, he was just trying to reverse engineer the *file format* to prevent vendor lockin.

The Linux kernel history was being held hostage to Bitkeeper's good graces. If the business reasons for letting kernel developers do advertisement and Beta testing disappeared, the free version would inevitably disappear and kernel developers would be SOL (as they are now).

If it weren't for the foresight to mirror *some* of the BitKeeper information in CVS, the kernel developers would have no developement history other than what they can dig up in the archives.

Re:zdnet.co.uk (1)

mrtom852 (754157) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301743)

Was the reverse engineering being done on a live server? and was that being supported by BitMover?

Re:zdnet.co.uk (1)

starmang (661689) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301751)

Samba only reversed engineerd the protocols, not any actual product. There's a difference. "Reverse engineering for interoperability" is not legally fine. DECSS anyone?

Re:zdnet.co.uk (5, Insightful)

Naikrovek (667) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301815)

His "reverse engineering" was this:

telnet bitkeepermachine
HELP
--seeing the list of available commands--
clone filename.c

seeing a bunch of garbage, then shortening it to:

echo "clone filename.c" | telnet bitkeepermachine > filename.c

wow that's what I call reverse engineering!

Re:zdnet.co.uk (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301831)

Legality and morality are not the same thing

Tridge intentionally reverse engineered BitKeeper despite the fact that he knew that his efforts would be discovered and would scuttle the BitKeeper donation.

Before 1972 it was "legal" to dispose of hazardous waste on your property. It was still immoral to do so knowing that various nastiness would migrate across the property line and into your neighbor's well.

Tridge is not in the right. Tridge has demonstrated his immaturity by disregarding the effects of his actions on others. Tridge has the skill to write a source control system from scratch, and intentionally chose not to - all claims to moral superiority died with that decision.

Re:zdnet.co.uk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301921)

Of course this is due to the vagueness of the term `intellectual property'. Not only does it refer to an assembly of laws, but also to the expanding expectations of those in business. The notion IP in the parent's quote probably translates to `anything insubstantial related to my business.' Expect to find interpretations like this in future law proposals.

Git? (5, Funny)

Phidoux (705500) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301615)

I thought that's what Southerners say to their dawgs?

Re:Git? (2, Informative)

PhuckFonix (788199) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301649)

git n : a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible; "only a rotter would do that"; "kill the rat"; "throw the bum out"; "you cowardly little pukes!"; "the British call a contemptible person a `git'" [syn: rotter, dirty dog, rat, skunk, stinker, stinkpot, bum, puke, crumb, lowlife, scum bag, so-and-so] Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

Re:Git? (2, Funny)

krewemaynard (665044) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301885)

i believe the phrase is "GIT R DONE!", and has nothing to do with dogs (unless heavy drinking is involved).

you'd do well to learn some redneck, then try again later.

Is this for real? (1)

Tanami (601011) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301616)

Well the name is daft and some of the quotes sound a bit strange, and hasn't this thing sort of sprung out of thin air in just a week?

Re:Is this for real? (1)

Tanami (601011) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301633)

Okay, just read kerneltrap - I guess it *has* just sprung out of thin air!

git 'er done! (4, Funny)

qwertphobia (825473) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301620)

git 'er done!

wow, that has some rough edges alright (3, Interesting)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301623)

maybe the kernel programmers should take 2 weeks and fix the basic flaws of git, like the business of not storing deltas to files

Re:wow, that has some rough edges alright (3, Interesting)

PeterBrett (780946) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301732)

..like the business of not storing deltas to files

Actually, that's a feature. One of Linus' main objections to existing SCMs was that they're too slow -- and most of that sluggishness comes from the time necessary to calculate and resolve deltas in the ubiquitous RCS files.

As far as I can tell, it's actually working pretty well so far.

Re:wow, that has some rough edges alright (1)

jockm (233372) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301864)

I don't think anyone should expect Git to go out and win the SCM war, and be the one tool to version them all. It is a specific tool, made for a specific group of people, who have very specific needs. Regardless of how one feels about McVoy, I think he got it right when he said that Linus solved the 5% of the problem he needed solving. So Git may get some traction with other highly distributed, patch heavy projects. In the mean time there are plenty of options for the 99% of the rest of us

Re:wow, that has some rough edges alright (4, Insightful)

bilgebag (102479) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301903)

..like the business of not storing deltas to files


Actually, that's a feature. One of Linus' main objections to existing SCMs was that they're too slow -- and most of that sluggishness comes from the time necessary to calculate and resolve deltas in the ubiquitous RCS files.


Obviously what needs to be taken into account is that is isn't necessary to do the delta creation at the point of check-in etc, a background process could promote 'clone' type mods into 'delta' type mods at its leisure, maybe even with a delay so only patches unlikely to get reverted are folded down to delta format.

That way the workload gets distributed as well as the actual development.

I thought... (1)

chkorn (799133) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301624)

.. that this desicion was made a few days before. not today? mh. ok. well. i think that git's way to manage source is nice. but in my opinion a (better) frontend must be coded. the actual version is really strange to handle. what are your experiences with that tool?

Re:I thought... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301812)

Your opinion doesn't count, since this tool isn't written for you - it's written by the kernel developpers for the kernel developpers.

groklaw has some info on recent Tridge spotting (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301629)

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200504210 23821174

Tridge tells what he did (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301631)

I guess this is the logical place to note the newest Groklaw story, Tridge Speaks [groklaw.net] where Tridge tells his side of the story, or at least a brief overview from his perspective.

Based on Monotone it seems (4, Informative)

Carl (12719) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301634)

The monotone hackers have the same design as this new git tool. They already adapted their visualisation tools to make pretty screenshots of the kernel patches development history: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/monotone-devel/2 005-04/msg00183.html [gnu.org]

Re:Based on Monotone it seems (2, Insightful)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301674)

Yes, and the Kernel developers looked at monotone as the tool that best suited their development model. However it was way too slow. Hopefully monotone and git will learn from each other and the result will be a better faster open-source distributed SCM.

I think Larry is going to be unhappy with the end result, because by cutting off the kernel developers he is triggering a lot of work on development of open SCM tools.

unfortunate choice of name... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301645)

What GIT Means. (4, Informative)

chkorn (799133) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301647)

Linus definition of GIT:
"git" can mean anything, depending on your mood. - random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not actually used by any common UNIX command. The fact that it is a mispronounciation of "get" may or may not be relevant. - stupid. contemptible and despicable. simple. Take your pick from the dictionary of slang. - "global information tracker": you're in a good mood, and it actually works for you. Angels sing, and a light suddenly fills the room. - "goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks

Re:What GIT Means. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301886)

"goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks
hmm.. gitsh does have a nice ring to it...

Well now. (0, Redundant)

millennial (830897) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301658)

It had to be said: Hopefully this helps Linus Git 'er done.

Re:Well now. (1)

millennial (830897) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301752)

Let the flames begin... I just realized someone already said this.

One Lined BitKeeper Client (1)

cibe (783341) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301666)

Now what was that one lined BitKeeper demo Tridgell did at the Linux.conf.au keynote today? echo "clone" | nc whatever 5000?

Obligatory (4, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301668)

Now, expect a thundering herd of comments like:
Great! Now, Linus can be helping to build OSS counterparts to commercial software that can be truly trusted, rather than rely on the whims of a commercial vendor.
and
This is just another example of where OSS software is MORE RELIABLE than their commercial counterparts.
The thing is, they'd be right.

The only thing is to remember: The terms of Linus' use of BK was noncommercial which is poison to a commercial entity. The combination of closed-source + no charge == noncommercial. If it was OSS, with a GPL-like license, at least the OSS community could give something back to BK that wasn't money, but it wasn't, and BK had no opportunity to profit in ANY WAY from this move.

I'm not surprised this didn't work out well.

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301700)

This is just another example of where OSS software is MORE RELIABLE than their commercial counterparts. The thing is, they'd be right.

GIT is FAR from bein a real SCM. Comercial software kick the ass of git, even if git is the best tool for managing linux

Re:Obligatory (4, Insightful)

wed128 (722152) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301710)

yea, but the fact that BitKeeper was used was basically free advertising for the target audience of BK. System Designer #1:
"Well, after looking it over, we've decided to buy a Bitkeeper liscence. it seems more robust than the competition, plus linus uses it!"

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301802)

Thank you for posting this. It appears that almost no one understands the issue at the heart of the matter. Linus was using BitKeeper for FREE and due to the actions of someone else that caused BitKeeper to change the terms of their license, he can't continue to use it for FREE. There is nothing that says he can't pay to use it commercially. I don't know what the cost is, but if BitKeeper is all that good, maybe Linus or the OSS should pony up the money to buy him a commercial version so he can keep using it. If BitKeeper costs too much to make that practical, maybe they would see some value in giving a price break to Linus just to say that he uses their tool for maintaining the Linux kernel. Could the real issue here be simply that Linus is too cheap to pay for a commercial software product?

Re:Obligatory (5, Insightful)

Barsema (106323) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301884)

Saying BK did not profit in ANY WAY from providing Linus with Bitkeeper for no charge, is like saying Nike does not profit in ANY WAY from the fact they are giving Tiger Woods golf-gear for no charge.
In fact I think BK got a bargain and they've gone and thrown it away.

git, (2, Funny)

jago25_98 (566531) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301671)

Linguistic genius!

Tridge Speaks (5, Informative)

anandpur (303114) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301677)

From Groklaw [groklaw.net]

Groklaw's stevem heard Tridge's speech today at the LCA 2005 conference, Australia's national Linux conference, and he has a report for us:

This was taken from my memory of Dr. Andrew Tridgell's keynote at this years LCA2005 Conference.
Essentially Tridge did *NOT* do anything that anyone could ever possibly ever take as breaking a BitKeeper licence, as far as I can see. How was it done? He, like any good sysadmin would, first off telnetted to the BitKeeper port on a BitKeeper server.

$ telnet thunk.org 5000
WhooHoo! Connection! So, next obvious step that we *all* do is type in the obvious:

help
Back came a list of commands to manipulate the BitKeeper server and ask things of it. Well, according to Tridge, a bit of reading of the LKML (Linux Kernel Email List) shows that the "clone" command is the way to checkout someones source code repository.

So Tridge's massive "reverse engineering" project came down to a single line of shell script:

$ echo clone | nc thunk.org 5000 > e2fsprogs.dat
Hey presto, Tridge has just checked out from a BitKeeper repository into the file e2fsprogs.dat.

The audience was laughing and cheering Tridge on as he explained just what a Mountain had been made of this Molehill. And I mean made by both sides of the issue -- those who he said he was some Uber Reverse Engineering Wizard and those who claimed that he MUST have used a BK client.

Funny report, isn't it? Anyway, now you know Tridge's side of the story.

Re:Tridge Speaks (1)

oever (233119) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301839)

$ echo clone | nc thunk.org 5000 > e2fsprogs.dat

I don't know what the equivalent of 'nc' is on SuSE Linux, but

$telnet thunk.org 5000 > e2fsprogs.dat
clone


also works. I guess the slashdot effect can be extended to other ports than port 80.

Re:Tridge Speaks (1)

Ewan (5533) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301887)

nc is just "netcat", i don't think suse install it by default, but there's an rpm package on the cds for it.

Ewan

The ZDNet article gets it wrong (5, Informative)

slavemowgli (585321) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301678)

There's two major flaws in the ZDNet article, really - outside of the fact that they unfortunately buy into McVoy's lies and FUD, they get two things outright wrong.

1) BitKeeper's "free" license does not say that you can't use BK to work on a competing product - it says that you cannot work on a competing product AT ALL, no matter whether you use BK for it or not.

2) It's not true that Tridge hasn't "kept up their end of the bargain". He never used BK at all, so why would he be bound by BK's license? McVoy may not like what Tridge did, but let's face it, reverse engineering for compatibility is perfectly acceptable - even the much-maligned DMCA explicitely allows it, because lawmakers realized that it's important.

So, McVoy can rant and rave all he wants - the fact remains that HE is the one who did not keep up his end of the "bargain". The bargain was that kernel developers get to use BK for free, and BitMover gets free advertising - now that the company has established itself, it doesn't need that sort of advertising anymore, so they're just looking for a convenient excuse to pull the plug on the "free" BK.

The fact that McVoy doesn't admit that is probably to be expected, but still, it doesn't change the fact that he spreads just as much FUD and lies as Darl McBride, Laura DiDio, Maureen O'Gara, Steve Balmer and so on.

I, for one, sure hope he gets what he deserves.

Re:The ZDNet article gets it wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301819)

The day Samba buy (with big dollars) advertising, the media will undoubtly take their side in any story they want.
It is the eternal problem of promotion of "not for profit" in a world were exists concurence from "for profit". If the news reporter is "for profit", he can not be really objective. If is is "not for profit", he cannot pay the bills (or he is subventionned by some interrested party).
So, clearly, media must be reinvented. Else, it is just entertainement.

Re:The ZDNet article gets it wrong (1)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301826)

reverse engineering for compatibility is perfectly acceptable

Absolutely. You know, when Linus came up with Linux instead of extending Minix a lot of people were upset with him for the wasted duplication of effort. When Linus continued working on Linux when the BSD codebase was released and for years was so much more stable and capable than Linux, the same kind of "he's just duplicating something that's great" arguments were heard. Yes, Bitkeeper helped the open source community... but so did Andrew Tannenbaum's Minix and the CSRG's Berkeley Software Distribution.

So what if it's a duplication of something someone else has done? The only people I normally hear complaining about that kind of copying in competitive environments are monopolists. I sure hope Linus doesn't want to go there.

Re:The ZDNet article gets it wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301867)

The bargain was that kernel developers get to use BK for free, and BitMover gets free advertising - now that the company has established itself, it doesn't need that sort of advertising anymore, so they're just looking for a convenient excuse to pull the plug on the "free" BK.

No.

The bargain was the license. You do not have the power to redefine the bargain to suit your argument.

Tridge admits that he used the BitKeeper software without a licence -- and ignores that by using the BitKeeper software he became bound by that license. Tridge flat out admits that he telnetted to a live server on the bitkeeper port and interacted with the daemon that monitors that port.

If that isn't either illegal or in violation of a license, then be a man and post your IP. I'll "reverse engineer" your machine and see what interesting thing I can do. Remember, it's legal and you'll get what you deserve.

Re:The ZDNet article gets it wrong (2, Interesting)

kyb (877837) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301910)

Now this confuses me. The BitKeeper "free" license says that you can't use BK to work on a competing product after using BK. Isn't this exactly what Linus has just done?

Will McVoy ask Linus's employer to sack him? He should at least threaten legal action.

Old News for those at linux.conf.au (1)

Dante_J (226787) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301689)

This morning Jonathan Corbet mentioned this news in detail, at this talk [linux.conf.au]

However, It's a same that Linus wasn't here himself to talk about it, as in previous years.

So there'll be no re-enactment of that famous penguin nip [linux.org.au] , which made history and changed the world. :(

What is bad with copying funcionality?? (5, Insightful)

xtracto (837672) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301690)

from one of TFAs:
But that's not what Tridge did... He didn't create something new and impressive. He just tore down something new (and impressive) because he could, and rather than helping others, he screwed people over. And you expect me to respect that kind of behaviour?" wrote Torvalds

Come on!, so what if someone makes a program that implements a cool funcionality from another?? I see it in every game that has been developed in the last 20 years!, thats why whe have genres!, also, that would mean that OpenOffice is bad! or what about the same Linux (Unix clone??) or all the BSD's.

I think Linus went to far with that, so also to do SAMBA was a "non respectable behaviour" to him? wtf without SAMBA I bet they would be a really, REALLY big amount of people (and companies) not using Linux these days.

If he does not want to use it, then do not do it, but do not flame the author for doing it, and tell that is not a respectable behaviour! it seems that the most notable figure of Open Source has acquired a Not-So-Open State of Mind.

my 2C

Re:What is bad with copying funcionality?? (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301733)

Its the attitude towards it. Its a heroic undertaking when OSS does it and its stealing when Microsoft do it.

Torvalds was then quoted as saying (2, Funny)

dfn5 (524972) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301693)

"Hey BitKeeper, you Git"

erm... (1)

pele (151312) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301697)

Well, being a bit of a git himself, I don't see what all the fuss is about.

License anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301698)

I looked at http://pasky.or.cz/~pasky/dev/git/ [pasky.or.cz] and I didn't seem to read any license or specifics about the code. Anybody have more information?

Re:License anyone? (1)

PeterBrett (780946) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301808)

git license is in the COPYING [ehlo.org] file. git-pasky (the interface scripts that actually do stuff) license is also in the COPYING [ehlo.org] file. They're both GPLv2.

Re:License anyone? (2, Informative)

pe1rxq (141710) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301813)

Yep, GPL (v2)...

Its in the file called 'COPYING'.....

Oh No! (1, Flamebait)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301699)

Linux founder and leader Linus Torvalds ...

If RMS reads that line he'll have a freaking heart attack!

Re:Oh No! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301781)

"Linux founder and leader Linus Torvalds ..."

If RMS reads that line he'll have a freaking heart attack!


Why? They're talking about the kernel...

Re:Oh No! (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301811)

If RMS reads that line he'll have a freaking heart attack!

Not that I pay attention to the guy, but under his definition of Linux (just the kernel) that statement("Linux founder and leader Linus Torvalds ..") would be quite correct.

Now if you said "GNU/Linux founder and leader, Linus..." he'd get pissed. In fact, I think that would be funny.

Bitkeeper was a great descision (3, Insightful)

MajorDick (735308) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301704)

If it allowed him to work efficently (and it did) for quite some time

Very simply that time has passed, and NO-ONE other than Linus himself knows what works best for HIM and his direct team

The flaming is useless hes "The Man" and what he wants for us in Linux land is pretty much Law, besides, how many of YOU psting all these nasty comments about his original BitKeeper descision actually were granted access to it directly, NONE.

Linus is a pragmatist not a rabid OS advocate but willing to use closed source tools if its a winning situation for him.

Re:Bitkeeper was a great descision (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301729)

Mod parent up. Fully agreed. I don't care much for the flaming, but Linus made a decision, deal with it. I abhor the Stallman'esque attitude that if isn't open/free then we don't need it or should live without it.

Someone needs a social conscience (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301766)

Do you realize that it is appeasers like you who're helping Microsoft and others to keep people locked in their sub-par products?

Re:Bitkeeper was a great descision (2, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301744)

Linus is a pragmatist not a rabid OS advocate

*snort*

Linux is a great guy, who's got both strong technical and strong "people" skills - a rare combination that's made Linux what it is today. But he does get bent out of shape over operating systems awfully easily.

So is most of the world. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301706)

"Jeremy Allison, who wrote Samba with Andrew 'Tridge' Tridgell, is sticking up for his friend in the row over BitKeeper."

Yeah, well, so is nearly all the world, except for Linus and Larry McVoy. I'm sorry, Linus' actions are just plain hypocritical here. I can understand how he was pissed at losing a useful tool. I can't understand how he can promote McVoy at the expense of our freedoms, especially to reverse Engineer.

Mod me down, but Linus has too big of a head on his shoulders. He is NOT indespensible, thanks to the GPL. What does go around, comes around. And this action won't be forgotten. With all due respect to him, I think it's one of his biggest blunders in the history of Linux.

Politics is bullshit (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301741)

Yeah, a great blunder if you're blinded by GPL fanaticism and rabid politics.

Linus has always been consistent about one thing: you use the best available tool and screw the politics.

Tridge's clone doesn't work. CVS doesn't cut it. BitKeeper works! So, that's why we're going to use it even if it's not Free.

I'm beginning to feel that all this smacktalk about how Linus made a blunder is a backslash from the rabid zealots who got their feelings hurt when Linus opted for non-GPLd software.

Nothing like enforcing groupthink by mod abuse... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301787)

Thank you, moderator, for making my case about the rabid zealotry of your kind. My post was not a flamebait and you, sir, abused your privileges.

Thus saith the anonymous coward. (-1)

that IT girl (864406) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301809)

I don't know, it just seemed funny to me.

Re:Politics is bullshit (2, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301844)

Linus has always been consistent about one thing: you use the best available tool and screw the politics.

That's why he quit developing his shaky kernel (and the Linux kernel WAS pretty shakey back then) when BSD-Lite was released and jumped on the BSD bandwagon.

Whoops, wrong universe.

Eh? (5, Interesting)

Aldric (642394) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301718)

Although Torvalds is revered by many within the open source community as the founder of Linux, he also has detractors among the free software movement. There is even a conspiracy theory on news site Slashdot that the anti-Torvalds rhetoric may have the underlying aim of persuading the open source community to switch to Hurd -- an alternative to the Linux kernel that is being developed by the Free Software Foundation.

Did I miss something? I saw some comments to that effect in the stories, mostly as a joke except for the usual random nutcases that see conspiracies in everything that happens. Terrible journalism from zdnet here.

The rest of the article wasn't any better, being the most heavily biased piece of crap I've read since the last TCO study by Microsoft. Linus and Tridge both have valid points but the article paints Tridge as a villain breaking BitKeeper copyright (which he didn't) and terms of service (which he didn't agree to).

So now all kernel developers can say (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301745)

"Stupid Git!"

Re:So now all kernel developers can say (1)

that IT girl (864406) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301790)

That's exactly what went through my head when I read that! I wonder where he got the idea for that name?

ms mf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301789)

on a related note, Microsoft gets ready for its virtualization server.. bwghwahaha I'll tell you one thing's for sure... and that's MS isn't going to capture the Linux market. And Linus will see to that. :D lnnb

Maybe Linus is tired of the FOSS God mantle (2, Funny)

SQUAG (243737) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301807)

And this is his way of saying fork you.

Doubled file size!? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12301814)

From TFA:
Among the differences: Git can't rename a file; users must instead delete one and recreate it elsewhere with the new name, McVoy said. And it doesn't handle space efficiently;
a tiny one-character change to a 1MB file in Git will result in a 2MB file, whereas BitKeeper's file will grow only by one byte.
Does anyone know why diff wasn't used here? 1 byte difference (BitKeeper) is excellent, a 100 bytes (diff) is alright, but doubling the file size (Git) seems really insane to the untrained eye..

BitKeeper shouldn't be surprised! (0, Flamebait)

Theovon (109752) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301820)

I have nothing against McVoy (Bitkeeper guy) and his desire to produce a closed-source source code management tool. But nobody should be surprised that using it for the Linux kernel turned into a huge controvercy, resulting in reverse engineering. NOBODY. Think about the zealots we're dealing with here. It's a total inability to understand the culture he was dealing with that has McVoy taking so much heat.

Up and running! (5, Informative)

anpe (217106) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301841)

Today in the lkml

Subject:Linux 2.6.12-rc3

Linus Torvalds
Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:00:21 -0700

Ok,
you know what the subject line means by now, but this release is a bit
different from the usual ones, for obvious reasons. It's the first in a
_long_ time that I've done without using BK, and it's the first one ever
that has been built up completely with "git".


Complete message here [mail-archive.com]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...