Hacker News Reader

Clone when used in this sense doesn't mean copying. Copying pretty much means re-using the exact same source, like literally copy and pasted. A clone is just something that does the same thing as something else. I'm not saying GitBucket didn't copy or take code, I'm just saying that calling something a clone doesn't usually convey that they took code, it's just that they're very similar in what they do as another thing. You could say Gitlab is a GitHub clone but it doesn't look anything like GitHub (although it did at one time).

Even the name GitBucket is very confusing. At first, I thought it was referring to BitBucket. But it's not GitHub or BitBucket.

It's till comment that I realized it's not talking about Bitbucket

You're not the only one.

GNU started out as a UNIX clone, but that doesn't mean it copied code from UNIX.

There's nothing wrong with building a compatible clone of a proprietary program or platform; that's a valuable contribution.

... and?