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

GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 594 posts

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#541

Post by duskwuff »

gamache wrote: post #488
duskwuff wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was bad enough [...] when SourceForge had their "great purge" of inactive projects. What purge? I'm personally aware of some projects which are still on SourceForge which haven't been touched in >10 years. If there was a purge, it must have been limited to projects with no activity whatsoever.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/2929732/open-source-softwar...

I'm even more confused now. While the project monetization situation was certainly bad, it didn't result in the removal of any content that I'm aware of.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#543

Post by flukus »

jolux wrote: post #540
flukus wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but if you really didn't care about politics, you would keep using GitHub until they kick you off of it for thoughtcrime I do care about politics, but it is irrelevant to my projects. The time to care about losing access to your source code is before you lose access to it (like backups). Github has shown that there is a signifact risk to hosting my code there so I'm moving off it. > It honestly just seems that you…

>Just like I don't care about the politics of any other service I use, as long as it doesn't interfere with my using it. So I'll ask again. How, concretely, do Coraline's politics interfere with your current usage of GitHub?

They don't interfere with my current usage. I'm concerned it will interfere with my future usage and I'm taking steps to ensure that doesn't happen.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#544

Post by flukus »

camgunz wrote: post #539
flukus wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If her contributions to community management software are valuable, what does it matter her politics? Because she has chased away other good developers by bullying them and is now in a position of authority. > I reiterate that if you are looking for a place to host your code where a) nobody has political opinions or b) everybody agrees with you about everything, you will never find it. What? We had exactly that for…

When you argue for the "absence of politics", you're actually arguing for the "default politics we've had for generations", which is heteronormative, euro-centric, etc. The "absence of politics" leads to widespread usage of anti-LGBT, anti-women, and anti-minority slurs and policies that disadvantage those groups by not recognizing their institutional disadvantage.

Without getting into details, I completely disagree. Being apolitical is not supporting "default politics". I support LGBT rights and equality for all, but this is the sort of BS that is making me and many others switch political allegiances.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#545

Post by thaunatos »

joeax wrote: post #335
noobermin wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Half the team is remote! Kudos to them for making this work. Are you being sarcastic (esp, in light of your point 1) )? Out of curiosity from someone not in the know, would remote employees cost more or less than ones made to come in every morning?

> Are you being sarcastic Definitely not, I work remote. I feel I am more productive as remote employee, probably about 10-20% more. I read somewhere that for every 10 miles you commute daily, it costs you $10,000/year in gas/vehicle wear-and-tear/health and psychological side effects, etc, not to mention the lost hours sitting in traffic. Would you rather have your employees sitting in traffic, or working on critica…

I would love to see your source on that. (I think you're right, just want to read the original paper)

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#546

Post by Corrado »

nunez wrote: post #205

SIX HUNDRED EMPLOYEES?! I don't care how advanced GitHub is; that is an INSANE number of employees for this kind of business!

You do realize how much engineering goes into Github, right? I can't even imagine the number of DDoS they have to deal with on a weekly basis. Not to mention all the hardware they have to move around; any system with that many hard drives has got to be extremely dynamic.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#547

Post by flukus »

jolux wrote: post #512
electric_sheep wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was accepted wisdom at this point that software is people. Caring about people doesn't strike me as incompatible with caring about software --- indeed, for projects which demand collaboration between individuals (i.e. non-trivial complexity), I'd think it would be essential.

It's not a radical departure at all. It's right there in the Agile Manifesto, for chrissakes.

That's not what they meant in the Agile manifesto. They just meant they don't want to get bogged down by process instead of publishing something useful to users.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#548

Post by Sacho »

Sacho wrote: post #500
duiker101 wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't actually aware of this, looks very nice! I should probably take it for a spin! Has anyone tried it?

We use visual studio team services(previously visual studio online) for all our projects. The main pro is integration with all other MS stuff(something you expect as a MS-based dev). MS has also been working hard into making it usable with a Git repository instead of TFVC, in fact, there's a lot of features and workflows that only work with Git - e.g. branch for work item, pull requests, etc(I'm debating switching fr…

I can't edit my comment, so here's some screenshots to demonstrate what I mean:

The main discussion point in a work item: https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/docs/work/backlogs/add-wo...

Hyperlinking: https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/docs/work/backlogs/add-wo...

Example of a discussion in pull requests: https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/docs/work/productivity/pr...

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#549

Post by qbaqbaqba »

zigzigzag wrote: post #480
fergie wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SourceForge and GitHub feel different. SourceForge was always _really_ spammy from day one, GitHub has a far superior product. It seems logical that GitHub will eventually figure out how to make money, even if it is just by following the tried and trusted "project management system" model

SourceForge wasn't spammy from day one. I remember it back in the first year or so of its existence. It was actually really good, and an absolute revolution for the open source community as no such sites had existed prior to that. It immediately gained massive traction and was every bit as central to the open source/free software community as github is today.

SourceForge has a new owner trying hard to bring it back to life.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#550

Post by soared »

joeax wrote: post #335
noobermin wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Half the team is remote! Kudos to them for making this work. Are you being sarcastic (esp, in light of your point 1) )? Out of curiosity from someone not in the know, would remote employees cost more or less than ones made to come in every morning?

> Are you being sarcastic Definitely not, I work remote. I feel I am more productive as remote employee, probably about 10-20% more. I read somewhere that for every 10 miles you commute daily, it costs you $10,000/year in gas/vehicle wear-and-tear/health and psychological side effects, etc, not to mention the lost hours sitting in traffic. Would you rather have your employees sitting in traffic, or working on critica…

According to that I am net negative when I go to work. (Although I too am significantly more product at home)
Post reply on HN