Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dear GitHub

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 491 posts

Re: Dear GitHub

#221

Post by Killswitch »

dragonsh wrote: post #210
jonobacon wrote: post #116

Hi Adam, Addy, Andreas, Ariya, Forbes, James, Henry, John-David, Juriy , Ken, Nicholas, Pascal, Sam, Sindre, My name is Jono and I started as Director of Community back in November at GitHub. Obviously I am pretty new at GitHub, but I thought I would weigh in. Firstly, thanks for your feedback. I think it is essential that GitHub always has a good sense of not just what works well for our users, but also where the pa…

@jono Will you be able to answer, if github has any plans in the roadmap to open source the code in 1-2 years and develop in open instead of closed rooms. Given many open source project adopting it for their code repository its important question to be answered. Otherwise sourceforge.net story will repeat again, this time with github. Many projects adapted it when it was closed source and then when they open source i…

Problem with them open sourcing their platform is that the platform base is used in enterprise and how the bulk of their revenue is made... Who wants to buy milk when the cow is being given away?

Re: Dear GitHub

#222

Post by piotrkaminski »

danpalmer wrote: post #216

I'd settle for just a fix to the (minor) data-loss bug that I reported nearly a year ago, and which still crops up once a month or so. That, and something for code review. Pull Requests are terrible for code review, and it wouldn't take that much to make them so much better.

I got frustrated waiting for improved PR code review, so I built https://reviewable.io. It's best suited for private repos (since there's a learning curve that make throw off potential open source contributors) but it addresses a lot of the issues with PRs. Take a look!

Re: Dear GitHub

#223

Post by carapace »

Wow, what a bunch of whiners. If you hate github so much why don't you just fork it and fix-- Oh, right. It's not open source.

Well, there's your problem right there.

(I have sooooo much more in this vein but I'll spare you. ;-)

EDIT: No I won't. Fuck it. This is too ridiculous.

These guys (and they are all guys) chained themselves to github's metaphorical car and now they're complaining that the ride is too bumpy and the wind is a little much.

Don't whine about not getting to sit inside the car! Unchain yourself and go catch one of the cars where the doors are unlocked and open and the driver and other passengers are beckoning you to join them. (Apologies for the mangled metaphor.)

These folks come off to me like masochistic babies.

Re: Dear GitHub

#224

Post by [deleted] »

curryst wrote: post #107
beshrkayali wrote: post #73

I do like Github, and I understand how it makes the entire process of maintaining a code repo a lot easier, but what I'd genuinely like to know is why don't big projects just move to their own thing? I understand that there isn't a single solution that exactly matches what Github has, and that maintaining your own git server + git management/issues/etc.. app is a pain, but I see it as the only real solution. Developi…

It's a momentum thing I think. A big part of the Github platform mirrors a social media platform. When you meet a developer, you check out what they're up to on Github just like you might check on a friend's status on Facebook. Like Twitter, it's a way to get your name out there. Also, I don't want to have to maintain an account on a Gitlab (or equivalent) server for every project. Anyone who has enough interest to t…

[deleted]

Re: Dear GitHub

#225

Post by nikolay »

GitHub does certain things very well, other - not so much. I really think the best way to get them to focus is to start contributing massively to GitLab.

Anyway, implementing just voting won't be a such a good idea in the time of Emoji Reactions!

Re: Dear GitHub

#227

Post by scrollaway »

jessaustin wrote: post #220
grey-area wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An open question is how the community should provide feedback. Perhaps if Github used their own issues system to gather feedback on Github itself, they'd more rapidly improve it. I'm sure they'd feel a lot of these pain points in a far sharper, more visceral way if they were subjected to them daily.

Yes it is fairly bizarre that Github don't dogfood the issues function. I'm sure they have an internal system that they prefer, but even that internal system could have a public interface. Also, if the internal system is superior then its superior features could be added to the public system so that we could all benefit.

Where are you getting that they don't dogfood the issue tracker? It's a private tracker (private repository) but from what I've seen in the Github blog, they do... it wouldn't make much sense if they didn't.

Re: Dear GitHub

#228

Post by pvorb »

sytse wrote: post #172
pvorb wrote: post #125

The problem is that GitHub has a monopoly and is considered _the_ current standard for Open Source. But I think that once some of the major projects move to alternatives like GitLab (which has many of the features described in that letter) GitHub will have to obey its user base. Unfortunately no Open Source project with a large user base will dare to do the first step.

There are some open source projects with a large user base taking the step to us, for example https://gitlab.com/mailman/mailman Regarding the three demands in the doc: 1. GitLab has issue templates in EE and on GitLab.com https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/merge_requests/28 2. GitLab has the award emoji function that doesn't spam and acts as a voting system https://about.gitlab.com/2015/11/22/gitlab-8-2-release…

Yes, I already saw some of these.

Unfortunately, there's no Travis CI integration yet, which I've been using on GitHub a lot.

I'm evaluating GitLab CI right now. Am I right, that I have to host a runner myself if I don't want to use a shared runner for my project?

> You can setup as many runners as you need. Runners can be placed on separate users, servers, and even on your local machine.

Does "local machine" really mean a non-public machine like my notebook?

Appreciating help from GitLab's CEO :)

Re: Dear GitHub

#229

Post by metasean »

nikolay wrote: post #225

GitHub does certain things very well, other - not so much. I really think the best way to get them to focus is to start contributing massively to GitLab. Anyway, implementing just voting won't be a such a good idea in the time of Emoji Reactions!

Actually, GitLab counts some emojis as votes - so you can have your :cake: and eat it too ;-)

- https://about.gitlab.com/2015/11/22/gitlab-8-2-released/

- https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/pull/5724

Re: Dear GitHub

#230

Post by [deleted] »

technion wrote: post #153

Don’t make it so easy to submit bad PRs I recurrently refer to this[0] PR, and the subsequent discussion, as the reason why, if any project of mine gets any bigger - it will not be accepting Github pull requests. [0] https://github.com/technion/maia_mailguard/pull/42

[deleted]
Post reply on HN