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

391–400 of 491 posts

Re: Dear GitHub

#391

Post by jitpack »

felhr wrote: post #370

I just created and maintain a little Android library (a very rewarding experience by the way) so most of the complaints about Github doesnt really apply to me because the size and reach of my project (I understand the point perfectly though). But I read some complaints about the users and the issues they tend to open and I fully agree. They are a minority but I can't only imagine what people with bigger projects have…

Hi. your junior colleague might be interested in the security answer here https://jitpack.io/docs/FAQ/. It's an important matter so will be happy to answer any more questions via email/gitter.

You can also run JitPack on-premises and have full control over build artifacts.

Re: Dear GitHub

#393

Post by TheCoreh »

krschultz wrote: post #130
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…

An open question is how the community should provide feedback. Trello provides a decent example of how to do it well [1], but GitHub feels like a black box. I've been on GitHub since 2008 and I have been paying every month for years, but other than emailing support I have no idea how to vote for a feature request. My personal pet peeve is not being able to mark a public repo as 'deprecated'. There are a lot of other…

> My personal pet peeve is not being able to mark a public repo as 'deprecated'.

What I came up to work around this is:

- Create an org named -deprecated - Move the projects to the organization - Set the avatar of the organization to your avatar, with desaturated colors (purely cosmetic, optional)

https://github.com/coreh-deprecated

Re: Dear GitHub

#394

Post by bo_Olean »

jballanc wrote: post #97

It's 2016, and GitHub is stagnant. GitHub used to bill itself as "Social Coding", but the "Network" graph has not seen ANY updates since its original introduction in April of 2008 . Issues has seen very few updates. Even the OSS projects that GitHub uses internally have grown stagnant as GitHub runs on private, internal forks and maintainership passes to non-GitHub-employed individuals (e.g. https://github.com/resque…

How reasonable is it to make issue tracking and social interaction part of the SCM itself [with optional web interface] ?

git issues "This needs attention"

>> Issue #1 created

git issues

>> List of issues

git issues -u #11

>> Issue #11 up voted

>> #11 Important stuff, needs attention

git issues -d #6

>> Issue #6 down voted

git issues -f #4

>> Issue #4 flagged

Re: Dear GitHub

#395

Post by sethherr »

jeddawson wrote: post #317
joelhooks wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

95% of all my github activity is in private repositories.

Ditto. Maybe 98%. I think that's a big part of the disconnect I'm seeing here in the comments. Those of us that live in private repos are likely pretty happy with how things currently work especially since we're the ones paying to use the service. If it wasn't working well for our teams, we'd find somewhere else to spend our money. That being said, we're certainly the minority when it comes to users on the platform.

I guarantee everyone maintaining a large public project on github has private repos and is paying for the service.

Open source ties in with my work. Every one of my private repos has open source dependencies hosted on github.

Privileging the priorities of my private repos over their public dependencies would be shortsighted.

Re: Dear GitHub

#396

Post by sytse »

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…

We're working on a response to all the issues in the letter in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/8938

Re: Dear GitHub

#399

Post by Kiro »

jessaustin wrote: post #231
scrollaway wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If they're using it, they're doing so in completely different fashion than everyone else. That is, it's not public for viewing, submitting, commenting, etc. Indeed TFA indicates exactly the sorts of pain points that would be missed by those using the tool in such a radically different way than everyone else. If someone at GH had to wade through all the damn +1's then something would have been done about them years ag…

I think you should chill down with all the speculations. I only use it for private repos.

Re: Dear GitHub

#400

Post by throwaway999888 »

pekk wrote: post #287
Estragon wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe something more noble than a social coding site? I doubt it. Github has a reputation problem. I wouldn't put anything sensitive on there, given the attitude github leadership showed about privacy ethics in the Julie Horvath incident.

Even if you don't have anything against Github relating to the Horvath incident, there are other things like Github shutting down people's projects because they wrote a doc containing the word "retard." In other words, now they are in the business of regulating the content of open source projects (beyond obvious precautions like not hosting stolen credit card databases, child porn, etc.) They seem to think they're to…

"Regulating content" just meaning having some standards for what is hosted on their sites.

GitHub is (or should be) just another Git hosting site/Web frontend/misc. integration with other software project's concern. It should be relatively simple to just choose another website. If we've gotten to the point of saying that they are 'regulating the content of open source projects', we've already failed by making GitHub too important.

Post reply on HN