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

Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

gitbucket.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 88 posts

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#61

Post by dfc »

budu3 wrote: post #31
dfc wrote: post #17

> "It was saying GitHub does not allow to clone..." One of the things they did not clone from GitHub is well written prose. GitHub's blog posts are always well written and enjoyable to read.

To be fair to them they are not native English speakers. I would have an equally hard time (of not impossible) writing well written Japanese prose.

It would be impossible for me to write at all in Japanese. Romans would laugh hysterically if they read the blog I wrote in Latin. Which is why any corporate communications to my Roman customers would not come from my stylus. I can't imagine building a brand and or loyal customer base any other way.

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#62

Post by TallGuyShort »

djsumdog wrote: post #55
resoluteteeth wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you could easily think you were looking at Github. I think it would be polite of them to change it a little bit more. Also, while it's natural for them to want to have a link to their Github account in the header of their site, as it is now (in combination with the extremely similar look) it almost makes them look like they are affiliated with Github.

Yea, Gitlab and Bitbucket are pretty significantly different in look. Although those two were commercial entities that probably had the foresight to think about these issues. Gitbucket looks like it's independent devs just trying to create a clone in Scala. It would be pretty cool to have a github alternative in scala :-)

They also don't overtly describe themselves as Github clones. Slightly different goals: one tries to compete and aims to offer something superior, the other is intentionally a cheap knock-off (not intended to sound derogatory - there's a place for that).

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#63

Post by slig »

apetresc wrote: post #40

What I find odd is that, even though they appear to be publicly released, they still develop their own project in GitHub! Anyone know what's holding them back from self-hosting?

Well, I believe it's easier to get contributors on GH than to force newcomers to create an account on a new service just to submit a patch.

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#64

Post by savanaly »

Flimm wrote: post #58

Note that this is blog post is not from "BitBucket" but "GitBucket", it took my brain longer than it should have to realise this.

I didn't realize it until I read your comment and can attest I was extremely confused. "Wait, bitbucket is hosted on github? Wait they redesigned to look like github? Why is the blog post for this major cloud provider written in broken english?"

(to be clear I didn't have a problem understanding the blog post and don't mind that the english isn't perfect, I just thought it was curious).

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#65

Post by [deleted] »

joering2 wrote: post #21
sytse wrote: post #5

I want to applaud GitHub for doing this in a peaceful manner. They have every right to ask this. I think having all project develop their own UI style will allow for more innovation to happen. At GitLab we are greatly inspired by GitHub but over time the GitLab became more distinctive. And that allowed a trickle of innovation to flow back, for example protected branches.

Not really. I wish most GUIs would be the same if they are offered for pretty much the same functionality, like searching for hotels or flights. Too bad to see the smaller is giving up the good fight. Last thing I would care is someone takes my GUI -- only means I designed something extremely useful in the first place. Go ahead! Duplicate for everyone's benefit. And notice they said its a good first start. This will…

[deleted]

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#66

Post by [deleted] »

joering2 wrote: post #21
sytse wrote: post #5

I want to applaud GitHub for doing this in a peaceful manner. They have every right to ask this. I think having all project develop their own UI style will allow for more innovation to happen. At GitLab we are greatly inspired by GitHub but over time the GitLab became more distinctive. And that allowed a trickle of innovation to flow back, for example protected branches.

Not really. I wish most GUIs would be the same if they are offered for pretty much the same functionality, like searching for hotels or flights. Too bad to see the smaller is giving up the good fight. Last thing I would care is someone takes my GUI -- only means I designed something extremely useful in the first place. Go ahead! Duplicate for everyone's benefit. And notice they said its a good first start. This will…

[deleted]

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#67

Post by molecule »

apetresc wrote: post #40

What I find odd is that, even though they appear to be publicly released, they still develop their own project in GitHub! Anyone know what's holding them back from self-hosting?

What slig said, and also all of the infrastructure that GitHub provides for free.

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#68

Post by jerf »

sheeshkebab wrote: post #60
Artemis2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had exactly the same reaction. There are more screenshots of their previous look in other posts: https://gitbucket.github.io/gitbucket-news/images/gitbucket-... (there's even "GitBucket now supports current GitHub UI" in the post?!) https://gitbucket.github.io/gitbucket-news/images/gitbucket-... https://gitbucket.github.io/gitbucket-news/images/gitbucket-...

Not defending the ui aping, but GH css is open source: http://primercss.io/layout/ They should have kept it proprietary if their lawyers are touchy about liberal open source licenses. >Open source Available for use under the MIT license and built with open source projects like SCSS, Jekyll, Grunt, and more.

Open source covers the copyright. This is more a trademark issue. The trademark issue is independent of the copyright-openness of their assets, as it is not valid to infringe their trademark either with their assets, or with fully copyright-independent assets.

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#69

Post by JoshTriplett »

smaili wrote: post #18

I think it's kind of funny they start out by saying: At first, we have never copied any materials from GitHub so this is not problem. But later when you scroll to their footer it says: GitBucket is a GitHub clone powered by Scala.

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.

Re: Change GitBucket user interface to make difference with GitHub

#70

Post by ljk »

rexf wrote: post #44
smaili wrote: post #18

I think it's kind of funny they start out by saying: At first, we have never copied any materials from GitHub so this is not problem. But later when you scroll to their footer it says: GitBucket is a GitHub clone powered by Scala.

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
Post reply on HN