Open Source®™© fun!
Or not, as the case may be. Bitmover has (as anyone who's more in touch with the linux kernel mailing lists than I am) decided to stop shipping their free(ish) version of bitkeeper, because someone who worked at the same company as a certain linux kernel developer decided to reverse-engineer the bkd wire format. I'm sure this is annoying for the linux core team, but I'm selfish; it's an absolute disaster for me, because I use bitkeeper all over the place at home and at work, and don't want to convert to some horrid client-server source code control system.
And it's not as if I can go out and write a bk clone of my very own, because I used to work for bitmover and Larry would probably sue me into the ground if I wrote a clone of a product that he's given me copies of the sources for. (And, for that matter, I don't want to write a source code control system of my own. There's a lot of infrastructure that needs to be written before the thing would be useful for anything more robust than file mulching.)
Perhaps it's time to look into monotone (which, from a brief examination, suffers from the too-long-name syndrome. Bitkeeper, and Clearcase, and every other source code control system I've used in the recent past has the useful command syntax of ``name command [args]'', and having to type something like ``monotone command [args]'' over and over and over and over and over again would pretty rapidly drive me to clearcase-style levels of screaming abuse at the version control system. (nope; monotone won't work, because it's written in C++ and it requires g-fucking-cc version 3.2, which means I won't be able to build it on mastodon, and if the version control system won't work on my systems, I won't use it.)
I've obviously forgotten the BOFH's mantra (All hardware sucks, all software sucks) and will have to pay my penance one way or another.