3 ms·
With choice of version control so important for any project, how can they be so light on details about what theirs is or how it compares to the very strong comp
by wgj 17y ago
With choice of version control so important for any project, how can they be so light on details about what theirs is or how it compares to the very strong competitors already out there?
- dlsspy 17y agoThe benefits of having software on Joel should be self-evident.
- DannoHung 17y agoObviously FogBugz did it themselves because they are the most highly documented sufferers of NIH syndrome.
- DenisM 17y agoThey are? I know they used VNC for their remote help thingie. What's the charge?
- btn 17y agoWriting their own language/compiler surprised a lot of people: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/09/01b.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/09/01b.html
- zaphar 17y agoWhy? It worked. It solved a problem they had. And they are successful as a business. It's only surprising if you think their problem was a non-issue. Sometimes NIH just means your doing something no-one else has a solution for. Google gets accused of NIH quite a bit too but when your serving billions of requests per second you find issues with libraries, frameworks and services that no one else sees. It's not NIH when you are solving a problem no one has solved or at least solved and made publicly available.
- mahmud 17y agoBig Soft is the most highly documented. Sun, IBM, Oracle, Microsoft .. those guys do it all in-house. Fogcreek is Joe Nobody in terms of software; they're like a CGI extra from LotR trying to walk the red carpet at Cannes. They are not even close to "highly documented"; someday they will get there, but not today.
- look_lookatme 17y agoAgreed. That part of the pitch is pretty off-putting. I'd wager to guess it's just subversion, but who knows?
- kylec 17y agoIt's Mercurial, but it is a bit odd that's not mentioned anywhere on the site. The only thing I can think of is that maybe they're planning on having it work with other VCSs?
- timdorr 17y agoI was able to figure it out with this image: http://fogcreek.com/Kiln/i/en-US/LearnMore/StartReviewsEffortlessly_small.png http://fogcreek.com/Kiln/i/en-US/LearnMore/StartReviewsEffor... Although, I got confused when I saw this one: http://fogcreek.com/Kiln/i/en-US/LearnMore/ReviewEverything_small.png http://fogcreek.com/Kiln/i/en-US/LearnMore/ReviewEverything_... Still, not even a mention of the OSS project that you're basing your product on? Way to spit in the face of the massive coding effort you're using for free...
- gecko 17y agoWe're not trying to hide it; trust me. In fact, we consider using Mercurial a really big selling point. We're just still working on clarifying the website.
- timdorr 17y agoOk, I see that you made some tweaks, which is helpful. I understand that you don't have ill will, but it's important to play fair. Also, so you don't get in a heap of trouble later, make sure you're posting source code if you're distributing it, as it's GPLv2.
- gecko 17y agoMerely calling Mercurial does not mean we have to license our whole product under the GPL. Modifications we make to Mercurial will of course be shipped.
- kamens 17y agoThe answer is Mercurial -- we'll be making the website much more straightforward as we flesh out its content very soon.