51–60 of 594 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gitlab is a fully featured and ready full replacement for Github. Additionally, the Gitlab team is far more competent and listens better to user feedback.
I have never used GitLab, but I keep hearing lots of positive things. Is there anything they don't do as well or better than Github?
The thought of losing Github to the startup graveyard is kind of scary. It was bad enough to lose Google Code and when SourceForge had their "great purge" of inactive projects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gitlab is a fully featured and ready full replacement for Github. Additionally, the Gitlab team is far more competent and listens better to user feedback.
I have never used GitLab, but I keep hearing lots of positive things. Is there anything they don't do as well or better than Github?
(1) They went on a hiring spree in 2015-16, dramatically increasing their costs before their revenue was able to keep up. Something to keep an eye on in 2017.
(2) Half the team is remote! Kudos to them for making this work.
>The new digs gave employees a reason to come into the office. Visitors would enter a lobby modeled after the White House’s Oval Office before making their way to a replica of the Situation Room. The company also erected a statue of its mascot, a cartoon octopus-cat creature known as the Octocat. The 55,000-square-foot space is filled with wooden tables and modern art. The Sillicon Valley episodes write themselves it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do they only hire women and minorities? A quick google turned up their "New Hires" blog ( https://github.com/blog/category/hire ) and that is made up of mostly white men. Granted the latest hire is from 2015. Is there something I'm missing?
The reality is that they have outreach programs to encourage applications from people who are women or minorities. But it doesn't take long for the kneejerk reaction to be that they hate white men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As opposed to the hiring of people based on their demonstrated ability to contribute to your team. S/he's reacting to the perception that people are being hired primarily on, or being heavily credited for, their identities. I'm not expressing an opinion on the idea, just outlining the debate for you.
The implication was clear enough - which is why I asked for substantiation. 1. does github in fact "only hire women and minorities" at the expense of superior, talented white men? 2. assuming #1 is true, what evidence is there that said hiring practices are at the root of their financial difficulties? It's easy to throw out loaded statements. I don't think it's nuts to request clarification.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do they only hire women and minorities? A quick google turned up their "New Hires" blog ( https://github.com/blog/category/hire ) and that is made up of mostly white men. Granted the latest hire is from 2015. Is there something I'm missing?
The reality is that they have outreach programs to encourage applications from people who are women or minorities. But it doesn't take long for the kneejerk reaction to be that they hate white men.
It's not appropriate to bring up in the way it was, but it's not a knee jerk to say that some of them absolutely despise white people.
[0] http://uk.businessinsider.com/diversity-guru-discusses-white...
I always freak about some other country attacking github. The world would crumble/ it's probably some sort of weird national security scenario.
The thought of losing Github to the startup graveyard is kind of scary. It was bad enough to lose Google Code and when SourceForge had their "great purge" of inactive projects.
