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

781–790 of 1001 posts

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#781

Post by blt »

knownothing wrote: post #777
blt wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Um, have you actually tried doing anything about this? https://help.github.com/articles/searching-in-forks/

> You will not be able to search the code in a fork that has less stars than its parent.

... but since it's allowed if the fork has more stars, I guess they're just trying to save compute cost. Seems like a bad place to scrimp to me.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#783

Post by bgorman »

jaboutboul wrote: post #758

Guys. Enough with the FUD please. I myself don’t even believe I’m saying this but clearly Satya Nadella != Steve Ballmer. Dude has seen the light and is trying to put the company on the right path. Every time they do something good all the tinfoil hats come out. Give them a chance. They’ve turned over a new leaf. And until and unless we see otherwise we should be giving them the benefit of the doubt. This is not our…

Ballmer didn't turn Windows into spysare the way Nadella has. Windows 10 is basically a rootkit that phones home about your every activity.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#784

Post by throwaway35411 »

abinoda wrote: post #719

I recently built a GitHub Markeplace [0] app Pull Reminders [1] and have been really impressed by GitHub's ecosystem strategy. They seem to taking lessons from Slack's success and doubling down on supporting integrators who provide valuable apps and features built on top of GitHub (ie. TravisCI, ZenHub). I hope this direction continues under new ownership. GitLab on the other hand is focused on solving every facet of…

GitLab has always demanded too much faith from its users.

First with CI, it was the all-or-nothing approach where you couldn't use GitLab CI with any other provider. Lately they have tried to fix this but it was a half-hearted development after a lot of complaints.

Lately with their DevOps approach, it's exactly how you've said.

I don't have trust in GitLab leadership and their product feels way too bloated.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#785

Post by AaronFriel »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #624
AaronFriel wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans* aren't built for decentralization. We can only keep so many unique names in our head a time, only so many connections. I don't have any papers to link to on this, but I think it's safe to say that's how things are - if not we wouldn't have created cities, national identities, and of course, newsgroups, message boards, centralized package managers and distributions, and yes, source code repositories. There is…

That's mixing up a whole lot of concepts. Centralization is about power. Cities generally have very little centralization. Almost no interactions in a city go through a central entity, similarly for countries. Concentration is something different than centralization. Newsgroups have very little centralization. Everyone reads and writes through different servers, and you can trivially switch servers without any impact…

Just because cities, countries, and newsgroups allow lots of different entities to participate doesn't mean they aren't centralizing. The strong incentives to place like with like result in forums with topics, subforums with subtopics. Districts become heterogeneous and we get things like Chinatown or the Castro District.

And these agglomerations of like with like occur spontaneously at pretty much every scale. You're quite literally missing the forest for the trees.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#786

Post by arashdelijani »

mips_avatar wrote: post #553
013a wrote: post #259

This is a completely smart purchase on Microsoft's part. I can't imagine more synergy between two companies: - Microsoft has always been the largest developer advocate of any of the major tech players (Google has been a great contender for this position since 2010). - Microsoft has moved most of their open source projects to Github. - Microsoft is a major contributor to Git, including massive infrastructure projects…

I think that the biggest loser is going to be IBM clearcase. Especially in government/defense work the developers want to use git, but can’t get it because of lack of security reviews. I can guarantee you that Microsoft sales people are already calling every software group manager at all the defense contractors.

Can you elaborate on this? Why does using git preclude security reviews?

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#787

Post by da_chicken »

crb002 wrote: post #711
flatline wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also spent years working with Microsoft’s proprietary technologies. The reality of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish was still alive and well as late as 2011 when I mostly stopped dealing with them. Since that time they have definitely taken a new direction, with increasing adoption of Linux in particular, but I have trouble belieiving the corporate DNA has been so thoroughly overwritten in the last few years that this d…

Except now they have billion dollar data centers they need your servers on and don't care if you use their software as long as they turn a profit from the hosting. Bill G is probably kicking himself for not renting servers decades ago.

"Decades"? Bandwidth requirements and difficulty of virtualization essentially precluded enterprise cloud hosting much more than one decade ago. Virtualization was essentially impractical or mainframe only until Intel added VT-x. Two decades ago most Internet users were on AOL dialup. And anyways, Azure is #2 behind AWS, so it's not like they're doing badly.
Post reply on HN