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

Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#531

Post by [deleted] »

blt wrote: post #96
obl wrote: post #16

Tangentially related, but maybe microsoft could actually do that : why is github's search so terribly bad ? If they had developed a good powerful code search (custom semantic engine for most used languages, complex queries, exact/fuzzy matches for syntax, use of history, etc) they could have become the primary way you interact with code you don't know yet. As it stands now it's simply more efficient to clone and use…

It is shockingly bad. The fact that you can't code search in a fork blows my mind. How have they not fixed this basic, important feature after so many years? What could possibly make it more difficult than a few person-months of effort?

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#533

Post by Symbiote »

frutiger wrote: post #498
indigochill wrote: post #339

Heck, I already prefer Gitlab and/or Bitbucket because they let me run free (or at least self-hosted in Gitlab's case, not sure what their hosted option's like) private repos. Github's just got the mindshare going for it. But maybe now that'll change.

If you ever get something for free, remember something somewhere is subsidizing it. Whether that's the other paid accounts, which therefore must be uncompetitively priced, VC funding (which will eventually run out), or your data is sold.

> your data is sold

It's now easier to see some of this, with the GDPR rules.

The Gitlab cookie page lists 80 "marketing" cookies which may be set: https://about.gitlab.com/privacy/cookies/

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#534

Post by EGreg »

rbanffy wrote: post #304
EGreg wrote: post #270

Guys and girls, I really don’t get this. It’s 2018! Why do we need third party domains to act as landlords for our content? Git is decentralized. Why do we need GitHub, when we can have a decentralized network of dumb servers storing various encrypted chunks of stuff, replicated? (At least use the new keybase software, or host GitLab on the servers of your choice.) Why do we need to choose a landlord? Amazon’s store,…

We don't use Github to host Git repos alone. We use it as a tool for collaboration - to track bugs, host some documentation, do code reviews, track workflow and so on. And, most of all, we use it for discoverability. It's easy to find things on Github. > Why did we stop at DNS? A lot of companies host their domain servers on AWS because Route 53 makes it convenient. A real successor to Github would allow all the extr…

Back in 2011 I saw this problem — that social networking (profiles, ratings, collaboration of all kinds) is all based on centralized platforms.

Even github as you said provides all the social layer on top of git and you jusy have to trust them.

There was no good software to take care of that stuff. So we built it. It’s exactly the federated API layer you’re talking about!

Here it is:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#535

Post by bamboozled »

indigochill wrote: post #339

Heck, I already prefer Gitlab and/or Bitbucket because they let me run free (or at least self-hosted in Gitlab's case, not sure what their hosted option's like) private repos. Github's just got the mindshare going for it. But maybe now that'll change.

What makes you think the same thing won’t happen to GitLab?

No one would’ve dreamed of this happening 5-10 years back.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#536

Post by jasonvorhe »

EastSmith wrote: post #520

I am very interested in what will happen with these accounts (t name a few) the next few weeks / months: https://github.com/torvalds/linux https://github.com/mozilla https://github.com/google

Do you seriously expect anything to happen to these accounts? On what grounds?

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#537

Post by ozim »

rbosinger wrote: post #397
closeparen wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This dovetails nicely with Windows Subsystem for Linux, VS Code, and Microsoft’s ongoing play to capture the Silicon Valley hipster development ecosystem that Apple is alienating.

Yeah, the open source dev community may very well see Microsoft quite differently in upcoming years if they keep playing their cards this way.

I think that this is real "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS" and they know it will bring them good times.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#538

Post by zzzcpan »

st26 wrote: post #353
nyxtom wrote: post #197

It's interesting that the HN community continues to make reference to the prospect of a decentralized internet when Git was built to be decentralized in the first place. In spite of this, we all have congregated around GitHub for the community and are shocked when the centralized source we've been using gets acquired by a company we don't trust. That's sort of the whole point of centralization, you can't trust it. Ma…

Centralization has an undeniable fundamental attraction. Everything, really, seems to naturally trend towards centralization, and then major scandals reverse the trend. We will probably swing back and forth between the two in perpetuity. The whole darn internet was built to be decentralized. And yet we all use GMail, the same handful of DNS servers, the same short list of major trunk hubs, the same shrinking list of…

> Centralization has an undeniable fundamental attraction. Everything, really, seems to naturally trend towards centralization

How so? Centralization is merely enforced by the government and incentivized by the system it exists in.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#539

Post by jasonvorhe »

gerdesj wrote: post #503

Soooo .... Linus Torvalds knocks together a code repo thingie a few years back because Bit Keeper became a bit too non free (nice one Tridge P) and calls it Git. Git is specifically designed not to need centralisation. It turns out that git is not just for Linux and can be used to manage lots of software development. A few companies spring up with some paid for value add stuff - mainly centralisation with a pretty fr…

You'll be surprised to learn who has is primarily sponsoring git's development for the past years.

(It's Google.)

Post reply on HN