|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 23, 2024 22:47 UTC (Tue) by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
In reply to: Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system by paulj
Parent article: Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

> I don't think they were arguing to abolish Free Software or barn-raising.

The problem is "where do you draw the line?" I know I was being hyperbolic, intentionally, but seriously, do we want to ban giving things away?

And if giving stuff away is anti-competitive, then we should make anti-competitive behaviour illegal, not make giving stuff away illegal.

In this particular case, there are (or rather were) a couple of big contenders. There's Pick Systems (aka Raining Data, aka Tiger Logic, aka maybe a few other names too). Then there's INFORMATION, UniVerse, and Unidata, who merged into Ardent, aka Informix, aka IBM.

Then there were the minnows, jBase, QM, Reality, and Cache/MV. Ladybridge, aka a guy called Martin Phillips, was persuaded to release QM as the GPL OpenQM. (Incidentally, I didn't know that the "Open" has nothing to do with Open Source and everything to do with Open Systems aka commercial Unix! An earlier product, PI/Open, used the term Open in the same way, hence the inspiration for "QM on Linux" to be called OpenQM.)

Unfortunately, a company called Rocket has bought out pretty much all the commercial players, and the only real competitors left are Scarlet, Reality, and another minnow called OpenInsight. For example, I think the price of OpenQM has quadrupled since it was absorbed into Rocket a few years ago. UniData / UniVerse were always on the expensive side, but Rocket has raised the price of everything else to the same level.

I think that's why some of us want Scarlet as a viable competitor, but there's no way I want to leave potential Scarlet users up a gum tree if anything goes wrong, and given my experience trying to get Scarlet into my employer, I actually see the existence of a commercial version as a plus. I hope they come to see the existence of the Open Source version as a plus, too.

Cheers,
Wol


to post comments

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 24, 2024 10:38 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (3 responses)

Well yes, it is the anti-competitive behaviour that is unlawful.

Anti-competitive behaviour can be 1 large monopoly player abusing that position. It can also be all the corporate players in a market behaving in a certain way, which then undermines the competitiveness and interests of the programmers supplying the labour - which was spacefrogg's point.

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 24, 2024 12:54 UTC (Wed) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (2 responses)

> It can also be all the corporate players in a market behaving in a certain way, which then undermines the competitiveness and interests of the programmers supplying the labour

But that's called a Cartel, which is just as illegal as anti-competitive dumping. You don't make giving things away illegal. If giving things away is part of wider misbehaviour, you tackle the misbehaviour, not the giving away.

And while I'm not going to say the company I'm talking about was a one-man-band (I really don't know), it was pretty much a one-pony show, even if there was a supporting cast.

Cheers,
Wol

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 24, 2024 13:40 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

Who is arguing for banning giving things away? You've invented an argument that spacefrogg hasn't made!

AFAICT, spacefrogg was arguing against anti-competitive behaviours by corporates, including where the labour market is the victim of the anti-competitive behaviour. You are obviously aware of competition law. Not sure why you're arguing against positions no one here seems to have taken.

Jujutsu: a new, Git-compatible version control system

Posted Jan 24, 2024 15:36 UTC (Wed) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

> Who is arguing for banning giving things away? You've invented an argument that spacefrogg hasn't made!

To quote spacefrog himself ...

> Companies are not people! Companies cannot be gracious or nice or happy or caring. Like, you really think that? Companies should not allowed to give anything substantial away for free

If that's not spacefrog arguing for banning giving things away, I don't understand English !!!

Okay, and I admitted it, I've gone a bit over the top and taken his argument to an extreme. But it was his argument first. And as soon as you start getting into "where do you draw the line" you're going to end up in a war between the anarchists and the dictators. I'm firmly on the side of "(VOLUNTARILY!) giving things away is a good thing". If it's done with malicious intent, then you target the malice, not the gift.

Cheers,
Wol


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds