KDE Moves to BitKeeper 58
jonathan_ingram writes "After struggling for several months with a planned changeover from CVS to Subversion, the KDE team have abandoned the effort, and decided to move to BitKeeper instead. As KDE's press release states: "The KDE project had been using CVS for a number of years, but due to persistent and crippling limitations it was finally decided to convert the massive source repository to Subversion, a next-generation CVS clone with fewer limitations. Unfortunately, due to many unresolved issues and technical problems with Subversion, the move has proven impossible. After an intense internal debate, it was finally decided that BitKeeper would be the most appropriate choice for a new revision control system, given its proven superiority and track record in the Open Source community. BitKeeper has enjoyed wide-spread success and praise as the official source code repository for the GNU/Linux kernel."
Almost believed it! (Score:2)
riight, cmon they are getting worse now fast!
Send out the clowns... (Score:1)
Oh by the way (Score:2)
Lunar-Linux and SourceMage Merging [lunar-linux.org]
Re:Almost believed it! (Score:2)
Re:AND LOOK WHAT IS COMING: (Score:2)
Actually it isn't
Enough.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Could it be? (Score:2)
PS: I never tried Subversion, but i've heard it's quite good. Can anyone compare it against CVS and the competition?
Nope... (Score:2)
Google...Slashdot....in cahoots? Hmmmmm....
Re:Could it be? (Score:3, Informative)
SVN is like CVS, but with fixes for all the stupid annoying issues. You can actually version directories and metadata in SVN, which rocks. About time.
Re:Could it be? (Score:2)
Subversion has one thing that really makes it stand out from CVS : Atomic commits. If you during a CVS commit lose network connection, your repository will be corrupted. Another very nice thing is that directories are versioned (so you may actually "delete" a directory, unlike cvs) and you may rename files and still keep it's history.
For Windows users there is a very nice GUI client (Tor
Re:Could it be? (Score:2)
CVS is atomic at the file level - always has been, from its RCS roots. You can *not* corrupt your repository with a broken commit.
You may get a partial commit, but having played with atomic commits a bit (they're not exactly hard to add to CVS.. did it years ago then took them out again) I really don't like them.
The problem is if your network is that dodgy you want to be able to restart your commit when you left of, which file-level atomicity lets you do. With commit-level atomicit
Re:Could it be? (Score:2)
But with your scenario you will frequently end up with a branch that is in an wierd state. If someone else checks out the branch while it is in this state, they might get the wrong code.
It's a matter of taste I suppose.
CVS developers have learned to workaround the lack of atomic commits (group atomic commits?), but personally, I like the ability to have a single clean checkin. A checkin should either work, or fail. It shouldn't 'sorta maybe' wor
Re:Could it be? (Score:2)
Re:Could it be? (Score:2)
Arch attempts to redefine the whole concept of version control while Subversion just adopts the CVS model with a few changes.
The changes between CVS and SVN take a lot to get used to, but they are important. SVN
For real? (Score:2)
Not a joke? (Score:1)
April fools? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:April fools? (Score:3, Informative)
KDE e.V. board member Mirko Bohemian stated, "Following our licencing deal with BitMover, we expect our developers will be twice as productive, just as the GNU kernel developers are now." Linus Torvalds was not available for comment.
The only significant drawback of the deal is that KDE developers will not be allowed to work on or contribute to any other source control systems as mandated by the BitKeeper license. To
Re:April fools? (Score:2)
Frink: Yes, we call that the Dennis Miller ratio.
They had this ruled when I was in grade school (Score:2, Interesting)
Too bad that rule doesn't apply here.
Re:They had this ruled when I was in grade school (Score:2)
Re:They had this ruled when I was in grade school (Score:1)
Re:They had this ruled when I was in grade school (Score:3, Insightful)
That was just a cop-out excuse made by people with no sense of humour.
Re:They had this ruled when I was in grade school (Score:1)
The timestamp on the original article reads "Posted by Zonk on Saturday April 02, @10:17AM"
April fools day was yesterday, but I've already had my rant [blogspot.com] about Google's late April Fools joke, so I'll let it pass.
I formally apologize... (Score:2)
"Less is more," foolishly spake I.
Paraphasing Keidas, "Tidalwaves couldn't save the world from slashdotifornication"
Go ahead, flame me like I was SpanishInquisition [slashdot.org], or something...
OK Listen up Taco! (Score:5, Insightful)
Next year, ONE April Fools story. Got that? ONE! Maybe that way you'll put some thought into making it Funny/Insightful/WorthFsckingReading.
You can link to everyone else's cleverness in a Slashback (remember those?) style roundup.
That is all. Carry on.
GNU/Linux kernel (Score:1)
Linux kernel (Score:1)
Re:Linux kernel (Score:2)
Let me be the third to point out...
Is this for real BTW? The style of what he said seemed a bit fake but I don't really know much about bitkeeper.
Suurrrrrrreeeeee. (Score:1)
Two minute intervals? (Score:1)
A unified front against RMS (Score:3, Funny)
Since RMS never really respected KDE or Bitkeeper anyways, both products decided to team up and work together just to piss RMS off...
This is a big SHAME (Score:4, Funny)
Re:This is a big SHAME (Score:1)
Struggle? (Score:1)
These stories are getting worse as the day goes on.
just correcting one thing (Score:1)
Haha very funny (Spoiler alert!) (Score:2)
http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2005-02/1054.shtml [svn.haxx.se]
Could we mod an article -1 Troll (Score:2)
For those wondering... (Score:4, Informative)
Will they be changing back now? (Score:2)
Re:Will they be changing back now? (Score:2)