KDE Chooses BitKeeper for Source Code Repository

Due to severe problems with the scheduled migration of KDE's massive source code repository from the CVS revision control system to Subversion, the KDE project has decided to opt for the BitKeeper source control system as the more pragmatic choice. The full press release follows; further details on what this will mean to KDE developers and contributors requiring repository access will be posted shortly to the KDE Wiki.

KDE Chooses BitKeeper for Source Code Repository

Yesterday, the KDE e.V. signed an agreement with BitMover, Inc. to allow all KDE developers to use the latest BitKeeper client tool at no charge. The arrangement comes in anticipation of KDE's full-scale adoption of the BitKeeper source control suite.

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.

"A repository of KDE's size poses issues that the creators of Subversion would never have thought of," declared KDE release dude Stephan Coolio.

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.

KDE's repository will now be hosted on the same server as the GNU kernel.

"We are glad to support KDE by helping it move to BitKeeper. The Linux kernel developers have proven the reliability of BitKeeper in distributed development and KDE will now be able to take full advantage of that," said BitKeeper author Larry McFly.

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 comply with this requirement, KDE has
temporarily removed Cervisia from the kdesdk module until the CVS support can be replaced by full BitKeeper functionality.

However, like the GNU/Linux kernel repository, KDE will be available through a
read-only CVS interface for anyone preferring not to use BitKeeper for idealistic reasons.

As a matter of pragmatism, the KDE project believes it is time to move forward and embrace next-generation software source control.

Kalle Chrysler Daimler, President of the KDE e.V. Board commented, "While
we expect some belated opposition from within our developer community to
show up in the next few days, this move was really the only sane and pragmatic choice for the KDE project. We are now in good form to move towards KDE 3.5 and KDE 4.0 in the coming months."


It's a joke, right? :/

By Anonymous at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

Probably :)
I can't see anything in the CVS about koassistant

By JC at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

Pheeeeew ;)

That was a good one :)

By Anonymous at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

This is cool. Whenever I start to write a letter I think "man, I wish a little animated character would inform me of what I'm doing." So far on the GNU kernel, this has been a pipe dream. Thanks KOffice!

By Ian Monroe at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

I think that bitkeeper, since it isn't GPL, is way better than subversion. Good choice!


By mOrPhie at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

Subversion isn't GPL either. It's even more free than GPL. It uses an Apache/BSD style licence.

By Tim at Sat, 2005/04/02 - 6:00am

Go to planetkde.org

And now go to planet.gnome.org.

Very funny guys!

By Alfons Hoogervorst at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

Ha, ha. Nice one!

By David at Sat, 2005/04/02 - 6:00am

I thougth his real name Kalle Daimler Chrysler, isn't it?


By MNN at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

I think Chrysler is his maiden name, then he got married to Daimler.

By Anonymous at Fri, 2005/04/01 - 6:00am

I don't think that this change is good idea, we
shouldn't just look at the pragmatic aspects.
If we want to promote free software, we should
use free software. Not say "Do what we say but
not what we do".

If the free source management software tools are
not good enough, the right thing to do would be
support the impovement of free software tools.

KDE is one of the bigest open source projects,
this is not a good signal.

There exists other alternatives, here there is an interesting


Have you made some tests with GNU Arch?


(I don't know how well-tested or scalable is it,
however some free-software projects are already
using it).

see also


some comment on it at http://www.xouvert.com/

"The clean design of arch makes it trivial for anyone who downloads our source code to create their own local "branch" for development, keep it under revision control, then have their modifications merged, with complete history, back upstream at some point in the future. This is next to impossible to do with CVS."

By Pablo De Nápoli at Sat, 2005/04/02 - 6:00am

have you actually read the article? Including the date it was posted on?
And the comments? Especially the ones with "April" in the headline? :)

By cm at Sat, 2005/04/02 - 6:00am

Oops, the comments with "April" in the title were about something else.

Still, don't worry, you've been preaching to the converted...

By cm at Sat, 2005/04/02 - 6:00am


no more free bitkeeper. Is this going to affect KDE?

By Shawn Gordon at Wed, 2005/04/06 - 5:00am

Could it be that you're posting five days too late? :-)

By Anonymous at Wed, 2005/04/06 - 5:00am

5 days late for what? Did you read the story? It's not a joke, Linus has weighed in at http://linuxtoday.com/developer/2005040602726OSKN

By Shawn Gordon at Wed, 2005/04/06 - 5:00am

Did you read http://dot.kde.org/1112318366/? That's a joke.

By Anonymous at Wed, 2005/04/06 - 5:00am

Great April 1st post, that had me fooled for a minute :)

By Micah at Thu, 2005/04/07 - 5:00am