Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 02 Mar 2003 15:01:39 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed *notrademarkhere* clone |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> >> My counter-question is, why not improve an _existing_ open source SCM >> to read and write BitKeeper files? Why do we need yet another brand >> new project? >> > > I don't disagree with that. However, the question you posited was > "would one be useful", and I think the answer is unequivocally yes.
Ok, I'll grant that. :)
I think a BK clone is detrimental to the overall open source SCM world, is my main point. I was thinking more along the lines of "useful to 'the cause'" ;-)
> Furthermore, I don't agree with the "compatibility == bad" assumption I > read into your message.
Well, I disagree with that assumption too :) My main objection is that a BK clone would divert attention from another effort (such as OpenCM), with the end result that neither the BK clone nor OpenCM are as good (or better) than BitKeeper.
>> AFAICS, a BK clone would just further divide resources and mindshare. >> I personally _want_ an open source SCM that is as good as, or better, >> than BitKeeper. The open source world needs that, and BitKeeper needs >> the competition. A BK clone may work with BitKeeper files, but I >> don't see it ever being as good as BK, because it will always be >> playing catch-up. > > > Yes. Personally, I've spent quite a bit of time with OpenCM after a > suggestion from Ted T'so. It's looking quite promising to me, although > I haven't yet used it to maintain a large project.
Interesting... Here's the link, in case others want to check it out:
http://www.opencm.org/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |