@: It looks like you're starting a git repository.
Hello, GitHub
41–50 of 671 posts
Re: Hello, GitHub
#42I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…
Yes same here. I’m really surprised by all the Microsoft hate as if we were still in the 80-90’s. MS is one of the biggest open source contributors nowadays.
It's also really weird how people idealize GitHub. Did they forget GitHub was not a non-profit association, they were losing money, they deleted users repositories on their own, they had management issues, and people have been waiting some features for very long, specially open source maintainers? Also GitHub "forced" a lot of organizations to migrate somewhere else when they changed their pricing model[1].
Re: Hello, GitHub
#43The main platform where open source takes place is now owned by a company that thought of open source as a form of cancer, vocally talked against it in a disrespectful manner for no reason, promoted fear/uncertainty/doubt campaigns, and even to this day continues to troll companies with patents. That is not a great place to be in. Personally, I think everyone should just move their projects somewhere else before Micr…
> thought of open source as a form of cancer, vocally talked against it
Not that I deny it, because can you point me to some examples of this?
Re: Hello, GitHub
#44I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…
>2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) >3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. Nat seems like a decent candidate for GitHub CEO, but i'm having trouble reconciling Microsoft's commitment to keeping GitHub an independent platform with their installing a new CEO. that's not re…
Github was actively looking for a new CEO. It's not like MS executed a coup here.
Re: Hello, GitHub
#45> I’m not asking for your trust, but I’m committed to earning it.
Love this line. I had followed Xamarin when it was independent and I get a strong feeling that Nat wrote this himself and it's not just a PR speak. I am cautiously optimistic about GitHub going forward.
Re: Hello, GitHub
#46I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…
People should get to know who Microsoft Cloud + AI Group Executive Vice President [Scott Guthrie] is. GitHub will be under his watch and all these years he has done nothing but wonders for the developers and the brand.
Re: Hello, GitHub
#47I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…
>2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) >3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. Nat seems like a decent candidate for GitHub CEO, but i'm having trouble reconciling Microsoft's commitment to keeping GitHub an independent platform with their installing a new CEO. that's not re…
They didn't install their CEO.
Re: Hello, GitHub
#48The main platform where open source takes place is now owned by a company that thought of open source as a form of cancer, vocally talked against it in a disrespectful manner for no reason, promoted fear/uncertainty/doubt campaigns, and even to this day continues to troll companies with patents. That is not a great place to be in. Personally, I think everyone should just move their projects somewhere else before Micr…
> thought of open source as a form of cancer, vocally talked against it Not that I deny it, because can you point me to some examples of this?
Re: Hello, GitHub
#49I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…
>2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) >3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. Nat seems like a decent candidate for GitHub CEO, but i'm having trouble reconciling Microsoft's commitment to keeping GitHub an independent platform with their installing a new CEO. that's not re…
Their current CEO wanted out of that role, so they have been looking for a new CEO.
Re: Hello, GitHub
#50>My name is Nat and I’ve been a developer since I was six Oh come on give me a break
Instead of hollow frustration, you should try explaining what your actual issue with that is.
The issue is that I've been hearing that phrase at every interview from every candidate, on a lot of blogposts and presentations. It's a cheap and uncreative way to get under someone's skin.