Linus Torvalds (tridgell is the father of rsync and one of Samba developers)

See: http://www.realworldtech.com/forums/index.cfm? Action = detail & postnum = 3322 & Thread = 4 & entryid = 49318 & roomid = 11

Name: Linus Torvalds (torvalds@osdl.org) 4/13/05

I will not join a public debate (flame wars) provoked by an anonymous user ). But this time I will respond because rwt (http://ww.realworldtech.com) is not slash-dot.

In fact, in this case, I understand and respect both parties (the open source software developers who reverse engineer bitkeeper are one party and the bitkeeper developer is the other ). This directly affects my work, so I am qualified to say two sentences.

Unlike some people, I don't judge whether a person is good or bad based on whether he is an open-source software developer. Therefore, in this case, I will not set my position in advance to determine which side of the incident is "evil" (so evil is wrong ).

As my book says, what I think is important is what software you have made. As for whether you want to sell it or distribute it for free, this is your private affair. No matter what you choose, your morality is flawless. I firmly believe that open source can make good software, but open source has nothing to do with morality. Open source means engineering.

So I believe that open-source technologies will become more and more perfect (of course, it takes time), but open-source is not an imperative ). I am open-source because it is interesting and I think it makes sense to do so in the long run.

For some reason, many open-source communities are reluctant to accept my point of view. Too many people regard open source as a war, a war of "Free Software" and "evil empire. Note that I think this is the difference between "Real open-source software developers" and "Free Software Developers.

Tridge could have done something more constructive. He can write the best SCM software on the planet and beat bitkeeper in this way.

Tridge could have been my hero.

There is no doubt that bitkeeper has greatly promoted SCM technology. If anyone doubts this, it means he has no idea about SCM. Of course I like a SCM software that is similar to bitkeeper, if it exists.

However, tridge does not do anything meaningful. He doesn't want to write a better software than bitkeeper. He did not even try it. This is not his goal. He wants to see the Protocol and data of bitkeeper. Of course, his actions will cause serious consequences. He also knows this. But he does not even intend to do any remedial work.

Tridge did not do some engaging innovation work. He breaks down (tear down) other interesting innovative works, just because he has this ability. He didn't help others, but made a mess with the work of many people. Do you want me to pay tribute to such behavior *?

Do not compare this behavior with OpenOffice (or samba, yes, tridge writes Samba. OpenOffice and Samba have done meaningful work and are technically advanced. These two projects view the file data (probably referring to Microsoft's data) because they use the data and they do not reverse engineer others' products.

Now, I can only face the reality and write my own code tracing tool, because I can no longer use the best tool. No problem. I can handle my own problems. I am sad that some people are excited for the loss of commercial software, just because it is commercial software.

If bitkeeper is bad, I can still understand the cheers of some people. But this is not the case. Bitkeeper promotes technological development.

And you, my anonymous, maybe you haven't done any constructive work, so what I say to you may be playing the piano