[deleted]
Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
11–20 of 86 posts
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#12the proposal is cute and funny, basically the author argues that to make the contribution and governance process more open, everything has to be done on github to be more closely aligned with what project X,Y,Z are doing.
that is not open or free, that is the exact opposite of being free and open.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#13Kinda scary how de facto Github has become, that external tooling is discouraged. Github is a bad issue tracker, a bad code review tool, an ok wiki and a bad distribution platform. Still, one has to mostly use the whole package to get contributors. (Github has other strengths, though)
BitBucket is plenty popular as well, I run into projects that are on there instead of GH for Python. I kind of prefer BitBucket to GitHub the only thing GitHub does right is their "Explore" section which I don't think BitBucket has (or GitLab?) but that's about it for me. I don't care where one hosts code, as long as it's not some obscure server.
For a long time BitBucket was the only one with the protected branch feature that could prevent history rewrites on a branch by branch basis. Github finally added it after the force push that blew away so many critical repositories.
BitBucket also has free private repos.
I only use GH for projects that are open source because that's where people expect OSS to be.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
BitBucket is plenty popular as well, I run into projects that are on there instead of GH for Python. I kind of prefer BitBucket to GitHub the only thing GitHub does right is their "Explore" section which I don't think BitBucket has (or GitLab?) but that's about it for me. I don't care where one hosts code, as long as it's not some obscure server.
For a long time BitBucket was the only one with the protected branch feature that could prevent history rewrites on a branch by branch basis. Github finally added it after the force push that blew away so many critical repositories. BitBucket also has free private repos. I only use GH for projects that are open source because that's where people expect OSS to be.
I use Gitlab and just have it push to Github, then disable issues/wiki/whatever else I can there, and add a link to the Gitlab repo in the description.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#15From the comments on the page:
jimmyfrasche commented
The language spec is easier to read than the contribution guidelines
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#16Unfortunately the epic comment thread, very talky, none of the key stack holders involved, largely irrelevant chatter... Is a case in point of why github isn't the answer for everything.
Wow, a proper use of the word "epic".
I thought the original meaning was gone.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#17Kinda scary how de facto Github has become, that external tooling is discouraged. Github is a bad issue tracker, a bad code review tool, an ok wiki and a bad distribution platform. Still, one has to mostly use the whole package to get contributors. (Github has other strengths, though)
And it’s not even open source. They don’t follow the development model that so many of its users who are responsible for its success do.
It's ironic. GitHub, a closed, centralized and for-profit platform, has become the sole viable place for open source.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#18I wonder if Google really loves Gerrit, or if it’s just a legacy NIH attachment and some of Google’s graybeards just refuse to let it go. Having worked with Gerrit in the past, I can say without a shadow of a doubt, it’s an abomination and I’d lop off a limb rather than voluntarily use Gerrit again.
Do you really think Google can really put their whole development and review infrastructure into the hands of a relatively small company named GitHub?
The same platform where you see "GitHub is down" on HN every couple of months?
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#19If one cannot figure out how to setup a development environment (with detailed guides), how can one be expected to actually make a meaningful contribution in a much more difficult domain like compiler development? For this purpose alone I think the current approach is something that Google will not get rid of.
Moreover, why on Earth would Google want to create an external dependency for code-hosting and development like GitHub, that may go down anytime, making them lose a lot of time and money, especially since their own system is much more reliable (at least for internal usage) and they have all resources they need to maintain it?
Finally, it is somewhat really silly to think that a giant corp like Google will develop something truly free and opensource, without their own interests above anything else, which obviously will become an issue sooner or later with the truly freedom spirit.
Re: Golang Proposal: Just Use GitHub
#20Kinda scary how de facto Github has become, that external tooling is discouraged. Github is a bad issue tracker, a bad code review tool, an ok wiki and a bad distribution platform. Still, one has to mostly use the whole package to get contributors. (Github has other strengths, though)
BitBucket is plenty popular as well, I run into projects that are on there instead of GH for Python. I kind of prefer BitBucket to GitHub the only thing GitHub does right is their "Explore" section which I don't think BitBucket has (or GitLab?) but that's about it for me. I don't care where one hosts code, as long as it's not some obscure server.
GitHub has always had far superior code search features. BitBucket is gradually trying to add these, but they still pale compared to GitHub. I love just going through a repo by searching for things.