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

461–470 of 491 posts

Re: Dear GitHub

#461

Post by mianos »

nyan4 wrote: post #423
monkmartinez wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not Michael Bayer (but I hope to be more like him someday)... that said, what I think he means or could mean is that issues would be distributed along with the repo. Maybe something like a git log for issues that are attached to and/or part of the repo itself. Thinking about it, something like this would be sweet. I would immediately have a snap shot of things that might go boom when I run said software. eta: In…

Bugs Everywhere was one of the leading distributed bug trackers. They don't seem to be gaining any traction unfortunately. http://www.bugseverywhere.org/

Also, no GUI emerged. This is what github gives you on top of git.

Re: Dear GitHub

#462

Post by jessaustin »

vmarsy wrote: post #448
jessaustin wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A more plausible interpretation would be that a particular GitHub organization might wish to block the inputs of a particular user across all its projects. That is, the phrase "from an organization" is adverbial and clarifies "block" rather than "users".

You're probably right! I don't use organization accounts so I'm not sure what was the issue, it would be to prevent haters to troll on every project of a particular company?

Yes that would make sense to me, but keep in mind that any user may create an "organization", so this might just be a bunch of repos associated with e.g. a particular framework rather a particular company.

Re: Dear GitHub

#463

Post by bsder »

Touche wrote: post #276
ywecur wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree! I cannot fathom why people are still actively supporting GitHub. Even if you ignore the ethical reasons, which if you are an open source developer really should suffice, GitLab is better and more customizable in every way. Supporting it benefits yourself and all of the FOSS community.

gitlab.com is dog slow and my code is too important to risk self hosting.

Wait, are you telling me that every git repository isn't a full copy of the codebase that you could recover from?

Really? I find that hard to believe, but it makes me glad I use Mercurial if that's the case.

Re: Dear GitHub

#464

Post by technion »

peterfpf wrote: post #243
krschultz wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I normally put a big "[DEPRECATED]" notice at the beginning of the README. This normally doesn't go unnoticed. Another good example is harthur's "[UNMAINTAINED]" [1] [1] https://github.com/harthur/brain

Have a look at the trending erlang repositories[0]. You will always find, near the top, basho/rebar. However, the subject on this reads:

    ATTENTION: Please find the canonical repository here:
The same advice is in the README.

What this tells you is that enough people are not only using this repository, which was last updated in August 2014 with a change to the README directing people at the new source, but people are giving it stars this week such that it shows up as "trending" higher than the correct repository.

There has to be something wrong with the deprecation process if this happens. [0]https://github.com/trending?l=erlang

Re: Dear GitHub

#465

Post by spopejoy »

fweespeech wrote: post #108
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…

Yeah, I'd honestly like for a website that actually focused on "Social Coding" rather than the Enterprise Money that GitHub is focusing on. Tbh, that is what GitLab, Bitbucket does also which is why they really are only effective as replacements rather than improvements upon. I wonder if threads like this keep popping up if people will say "Fuck it" and build an OSS Github clone that focus on being the Reddit of Code…

OMG can we get a moratorium on "tbh"? Just say "Indeed" or some other filler. "To be honest" is bad writing even when it's spelled out.

Re: Dear GitHub

#466

Post by johannes1234321 »

deckar01 wrote: post #232
jhchen wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Promises about the future about Github’s roadmap is understandably difficult to make, besides by a very small number of people at the top. I don’t think this is the expectation. But visibility into past failure to address these concerns and the current status is long overdue. I assume when these maintainers reached out in private channels, they were equally detailed, and have waited years. At present, I’m not sure ho…

GitHub has settings for individual repos. People can opt to turn the issue tracker off completely. Why not have the option to enable issue voting? It could be as easy as stars for issues. Custom issue instructions would be trivial to tuck away in the settings page or associate with a specially named markdown file. They turn a wiki on by default, but you can't instruct users about the info you expect in their issue on…

You can't fully disable the issue tracker: Pull requests can't be disabled and each PR becomes an issue.

Re: Dear GitHub

#467

Post by neandrake »

bsder wrote: post #463
Touche wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

gitlab.com is dog slow and my code is too important to risk self hosting.

Wait, are you telling me that every git repository isn't a full copy of the codebase that you could recover from? Really? I find that hard to believe, but it makes me glad I use Mercurial if that's the case.

Git repositories do have a full copy of the codebase (unless using some large-file management, same issue with largefiles extension for hg).

But gitlab/github are more than just git repositories -- issue tracking, discussions, wiki, etc. One version control which includes most of this as part of the repository is fossil, http://fossil-scm.org

Re: Dear GitHub

#468

Post by neandrake »

npizzolato wrote: post #453
hk__2 wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your `.git` directory would become huge pretty quickly and you would have plenty of problems with people commenting on issues without having a repo up-to-date. How would you handle conflicts in that case?

How is that a different problem than people editing code in a repo that's out of date?

You have to be a coder to participate~

Re: Dear GitHub

#469

Post by neandrake »

asb wrote: post #61

There's been no mention of phabricator yet so I thought I'd give it a shout out. It's used by LLVM, FreeBSD, Blender, Wikimedia and others and I love it. It's under very active development and even if it doesn't solve every issue in this letter, by using an open source tool for development you of course have the option to customize it to the needs of your community.

Another shoutout here to phabricator. I started hosting it internally at the company a year ago and have near 100% adoption from developers for code reviews, additionally using the task/issue tracking for some projects.

Re: Dear GitHub

#470

Post by 13thLetter »

pron wrote: post #437
talmand wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And who exactly gets to decide what is "fringe"?

I guess that the majority gets to decide. It doesn't really matter what is mainstream and what isn't, as long as there's a place for both. Broadway and off-Broadway are both fine, but mixing them can cause confusion and for both audiences to be disappointed.

Unfortunately, we've seen a lot of situations where the "majority," at least of those who speak up, are (for example) opposed to heavily restrictive codes of conduct proposed by outside groups, yet the code is forced through anyway by project leaders. Majority rule seems to be valid only when the majority votes the "right" way.
Post reply on HN