Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
>Robert W Anderson <rwa@alumni.princeton.edu> writes:
>
>
>
>>I am interested in understanding why collab.net is supporting the
>>development of subversion. The FAQ only addresses who "owns" the
>>code. What I'd like to understand is: What is the vested interest in
>>subversion of collab.net?
>>
>>
>
>CollabNet was the initial starter/funder of the project, and still
>is. It's paid the salaries of three full-time coders for 2.5 years to
>design and write Subversion. It's "vested interest" is that it wants
>a CVS replacement... because it sells SourceCast, and it wants
>SourceCast to be a better product.
>
>
and to answer the obvious question here:
"why does CollabNet devote these engineering resources to a free
project as opposed to doing the same thing as an in-house closed-source
effort?"
my understanding is that CollabNet recognizes that version control is a
complex problem, and they know that a well run open-source effort will
pull in many more developers than they can afford to pay to work it
themselves. in return for making the project free, they get a much
better tool that they can use for their own purposes (as part of
SourceCast).
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Dec 16 18:30:16 2002