Revision confusion

This blog post by Códice Software (developers of Plastic SCM) discusses a recent talk by Linus Torvalds (no introduction needed) where he (in his usual style) lambasts all version control systems that are not Git, with particular attention to Subversion (for having the temerity to use “CVS done right” as a slogan).

The author of the post criticizes Linus for tooting his own (or Git’s) horn, then promptly upstages him by displaying his ignorance of every version control system that is not Plastic SCM (except perhaps SourceSafe) and lambasting them all.

You have to wonder about the qualifications of a developer who sells a product named “Plastic SCM” which isn’t a software configuration manager at all. As far as I can tell from reading their marketing materials and watching their screencasts, it’s a plain version control system (or revision control system, if you prefer) with no configuration management features whatsoever…

Back to the drawing board, Pablo!

The end of SourceForge as we know it

I got a nasty surprise on Friday while putting the finishing touches on Varnish 1.0.4.

I was updating package metadata and simultaneously working on the release engineering documentation, which includes instructions for generating and testing packages. As usual when writing documentation, I wanted to verify that every command line I included in the text worked as expected. This meant I needed access to a system that runs a RedHat-based distribution to test the rpmbuild command line. Naturally, I thouhgt of SourceForge‘s compile farm. Continue reading “The end of SourceForge as we know it”

Insistent idiots

The strangest feedback I got for my Vista sucks entry the other day was from an email from the VP of Operations at one of Diskeeper‘s competitors offering me a special discount on their defragmenter. Apparently, he thought that “thirty minutes later the disk has been wiped and Ubuntu is up and running” is l33tsp34k for “I am in the market for Vista software”. Continue reading “Insistent idiots”

If only Heinlein had known…

Every time I read about the RIAA lawsuits, I am reminded of the first story Robert A. Heinlein ever sold, Life-Line (1939). The story is mostly set during a lawsuit in which a coalition of life insurance companies claim damages from the inventor of a machine capable of accurately predicting the time and manner of a person’s death. The judge dismisses the case with the following words:

Before we leave this matter I wish to comment on the theory implied by you, Mr Weems, when you claimed damage to your client. There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is supported neither by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back, for their private benefit. That is all.

Nearly seventy years have passed, and they still don’t get it…