An Analysis of BitKeeper and BitMover's Strategy

An Analysis of BitKeeper and BitMover's Strategy

[Shlomi Fish]

As part of the "Better SCM" site (that is still under construction), I
wrote a few essays about BitKeeper:

http://better-scm.berlios.de/bk/

I am a former user of BitKeeper and the bkbits.net service who used it for
maintaining the code of two of my pet projects. The articles include:

An analysis of the suitability of BitKeeper for Free Software Developers -
analyzes the product itself, the support given by BitMover, the BKBits.net
service and the license. Contains some tips for new users.

Why a change of the BitKeeper licensing would be a good idea (from
BitMover's POV) - a rational analysis why a change in BitMover's strategy
can yield them a greater advantage in the long run. (note that I do not
recommend completely Open-Sourcing it)

There's also an old and slightly deprecated article entitled "GPLing BK"
which gives several advantages that a more liberal BitKeeper license would
give BitMover. (it is deprecated because I no longer thing a complete
freeing would be a good idea at this point).

Comments, suggestions, corrections and flames are welcome.

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish        shlomif@vipe.technion.ac.il
Home Page:         http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

He who re-invents the wheel, understands much better how a wheel works.

Re: An Analysis of BitKeeper and BitMover's Strategy

[john slee]

On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 12:18:24PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> As part of the "Better SCM" site (that is still under construction), I
> wrote a few essays about BitKeeper:

please do not spam the list with this crap

j.

-- 
toyota power: http://indigoid.net/

Re: An Analysis of BitKeeper and BitMover's Strategy

[Bruce Ferrell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 419 bytes --]

While the posting wasn't directly linked to kernel development, I did 
find the analysis to be thought provoking.  I think calling it spam 
MIGHT be too strong.

john slee wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 12:18:24PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> 
>>As part of the "Better SCM" site (that is still under construction), I
>>wrote a few essays about BitKeeper:
> 
> 
> please do not spam the list with this crap
> 
> j.
> 


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3257 bytes --]