3 ms·
Maybe so, but have the licensing and philosophical reasons that led Torvalds to move the kernel away from BitKeeper been resolved? Until that can be said and n
by abstractbeliefs 10y ago
Maybe so, but have the licensing and philosophical reasons that led Torvalds to move the kernel away from BitKeeper been resolved?
Until that can be said and news of that disseminated widely, I think many open source projects will consider BitKeeper as simply not having enough of a technical edge over Git to discount the cultural penalties (namely, "bad" reputation withing FLOSS and smaller population of users).
- wscott 10y agoI fully understand your concerns, which it why I try to post about bk periodically. Go look at bitkeeper.org, we are now fully open source and published under a plain Apache 2.0 license. No additional license or restrictions. So we can be as evil as we want and you are still safe to use it. ;-)
- asjo 10y agoBitKeeper was open sourced in May (Apache 2.0 licensed). The news was disseminated quite widely: * https://lwn.net/Articles/686896/ https://lwn.net/Articles/686896/ * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11667494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11667494