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

Microsoft acquires Github

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 840 posts

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#551

Post by jupp0r »

pritambaral wrote: post #387
stordoff wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is Microsoft alleged to have done wrong here? It starts by saying "stole my code", but then discusses an MIT licensed piece of code. Furthermore, I'd see Microsoft's reply: > I'm not aware of any deliberate copying of the Lerna code, but let me dig into it now and call all the devs on the team to be sure. If there is, we should definitely give correct attribution, so I want to investigate. [...] I checke…

> It starts by saying "stole my code", but then discusses an MIT licensed piece of code Unrelated to the rest of the discussion, I just want to clarify that MIT License != 'Do Whatever You Want' License. MIT requires attribution and maintaining the copyright license on existing code. Yes, if you don't adhere to the license's terms when copying code, it is stealing.

It's not stealing. I assume the original authors are still in possession of the code they wrote.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#552

Post by evfanknitram »

72deluxe wrote: post #529
karrotwaltz wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MSVC's stdlib is still a headache, just see the /std flag[1] which only appeared in msvc2017: you can either have C++14 with some C++17 features, or C++ "latest" which means 17 and missing features. EDIT: just noticed the article says it was also added to 2013, but my 2015 doesn't support it so idk. I can conceive PowerShell being good as a scripting language, but as a day to day terminal? That would my hell. And the…

Perhaps it should be renamed to Power Hell?

I really enjoy PowerShell :)

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#553

Post by baldfat »

ewzimm wrote: post #162
netsec_burn wrote: post #111

I still see Microsoft's predictable behavior in 2018. I have a friend who owns a Surface, and I was thinking it would be useful to put Linux on it (it was older ARM hardware). Well you can't, it's a Surface RT and Microsoft not only locks the bootloader but it also only runs Microsoft approved apps. That's their endgame whenever possible. Apparently people didn't like having fully locked down computers and they disco…

You still see Microsoft's predictable behavior in 2018 by looking at a discontinued product from 2012-2014? I think that's evidence that there has been a shift, and support for Linux has improved significantly since then. Of course, if the user's motivation for using Linux is in protest against Microsoft, this won't matter, but for those who work in multiple platforms, Microsoft seems to have the most comprehensive v…

Long time Linux user and it is still my preferred OS, but I never understood the hypocrisy of the MS hate in Linux. Normally it is written on an Apple product running OS X and a VM of Linux for a server.

Over the years Apple's laptops are the number one laptop at Linux conferences. As a whole Apple has been the biggest enemy to open source even though they have had some good open source projects. MS has had several years showing that Linux and Open Source makes business sense just like most of us have been saying for years.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#554

Post by WorldMaker »

jupp0r wrote: post #527
WorldMaker wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which partly was great marketing from Atlassian because it isn't like they are that far removed from "just a startup" either.

Have you missed their IPO?

That's a fair point in that I was unaware they had IPOed as many years back as they had (I had thought it more recent). It was partly a joke. But I have worked with people of a Fortune Xty company mindset that didn't consider vendors unless they were also Fortune Xty +/- Y companies, and yet some of them used Atlassian products despite being outside their usual Y margin, which I found fascinating.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#555

Post by ChicagoDave »

romaniv wrote: post #380
ChicagoDave wrote: post #337

This feels like Slashdot from 10 years ago. I thought the anti-Microsoft sentiment had dissipated, but clearly that’s not the case. I was a Microsoft focused developer through the bad years and even I thought they acted horribly against Netscape. They ended up paying a billion dollars for it and we’re forced to change. I wasn’t a fan of Ballmer either and thought MS had lost its way. Windows Phone started off nice bu…

>I judge companies on current behavior and Microsoft seems to be doing far more right than wrong. This isn't about behavior. This is about product management. As a reminder, Microsoft's current products include TFS (and I don't mean just TFSVC) and Teams.

And nearly everyone using TFS uses the TFS-Git repositories now, including MS itself.

The PM aspects of TFS are notoriously cumbersome, so I see the Github acquisition as a potential benefit to that side of TFS.

Then again, I think Mingle (Thoughtworks) is the best agile project management tool.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#556

Post by mrguyorama »

notheguyouthink wrote: post #302
Totoradio wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can understand those concerns, but what can they do to convince you they have changed?

He consistent and have a good track record for years. It feels just like yesterday that Microsoft was spying on windows boxes. In my mind, everyone has a "Days since last accident" counter in their head, and Microsoft's number is quite low.

>It feels just like yesterday that Microsoft was spying on windows boxes.

Windows 10 exists. Microsoft is "spying" on Windows boxes right now

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#557

Post by dj-wonk »

azurelogic wrote: post #399
unictek wrote: post #69

Gitlab is not comparable to Github at all. Gitlab is just about hosting git projects that's all. It's not community driven at all.

You're right on the first point. They aren't comparable. GitLab is a community driven, open core product that is far more powerful than GitHub. GitLab has an extremely robust CI system built in. In addition, you can even use them to create private Docker registries, which I find useful for creating my own private CI images. Plus, they have a better security model (5 tiers), wildcards for branch protection, and tag pr…

Why do people say "X and Y aren't comparable" and then proceed to compare them? :)

I'm not (only) trying to be pedantic here -- I'm just pointing out the loaded language. In both business models and product recommendations, people use the word "comparable" to justify their conclusions, rather than to explain their comparisons themselves.

It is all about framing a decision for a particular use case at a particular price point.

I guess you could say I'm the kind of person that can't help but notice that modern communication seems to be fraught with this pattern: let's state our conclusions without much justification and then choose our language minimize the "rationality" of alternatives. I think we can do better, as a community.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#558

Post by jasonrhaas »

samtho wrote: post #539
jasonrhaas wrote: post #526

I get it, its the way this industry works. Build up a solid product, grow the user base, continue to lose money until you sell the business and cash out. I'm not against the company or the founders making money. This is America after all. What is disappointing to me and others in the open source community is that we have zero say over something that we helped build. This sale to Microsoft is just another reason why w…

> What is disappointing to me and others in the open source community is that we have zero say over something that we helped build. Github was never a community project; it was never "ours" in that sense. Why should anyone except for the owners have a say?

Never "ours" in any legal sense of the word. I said in my post I can't blame them for selling, its how our system works. I'm just trying to think towards the future and how "we" can do it better next time.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#559

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

Kudos wrote: post #493
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seeing GitHub acquired, I’d speculate that Gitlab will go that route sooner or later. Bingo. It's bizarre to hear people stampeding to GitLab when they're subject to the same financial and revenue pressures as GitHub or any other business. Somebody's paying for those servers and bandwidth and that somebody is expecting a return on their investment.

Whatever happens to Gitlab, you have the option of hosting the open source edition yourself. If they get acquired by Oracle in the morning, a fork could conceivably rise to take its place.

> Whatever happens to Gitlab, you have the option of hosting the open source edition yourself.

The whole _point_ of Github was that you didn't have to host anything yourself. Just create an account and, bam, off you go.

On top of that, even if you did want to host Gitlab yourself, it's "open core", not open source. You'd lose a ton of functionality.

Re: Microsoft acquires Github

#560

Post by foepys »

oaiey wrote: post #494
azurelogic wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right on the first point. They aren't comparable. GitLab is a community driven, open core product that is far more powerful than GitHub. GitLab has an extremely robust CI system built in. In addition, you can even use them to create private Docker registries, which I find useful for creating my own private CI images. Plus, they have a better security model (5 tiers), wildcards for branch protection, and tag pr…

I find the argument that Gitlab is community driven a joke. They are not. And they never can. The community edition can never be ready for more than git hosting. We were recently evaluating it, and found that basic needs like code reviews are not covered. And their hiding of LDAP Integration (luckily the extended community stepped in and duplicated their module) is a joke.

I don't get your point. GitLab has basic code reviews [1, 2] and LDAP support [3]. LDAP support is better in EE than in CE but that's expected. What is missing for you?

1: https://gitlab.com/help/user/project/merge_requests/merge_re...

2: https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/code_review.html

3: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/administration/auth/ldap-ee.html

Post reply on HN