Live data from Hacker News

Hello, GitHub

natfriedman.github.io

171–180 of 671 posts

Re: Hello, GitHub

#171
post #153

How is MS expected to make money on this?

I think they shrink it a bit down and cut administrative overhead (synergy) and some engineering (eg atom (buuh)). The later they can also reorganize.

For them it just does not need to lose too much money.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#172

So I’m kind of depressed about this. I loved GitHub enough that I paid for a subscription without needing it and have all of my public work on it and my investment in OSS is quite significant. People saying that it is easy to migrate don’t know what they are talking about. GitHub isn’t just Git hosting, but a social network of open source developers and projects. You can’t migrate stars, issues with comments and the…

It's the network effect that you can't move.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#173

I recognize this isn't an opinion that will resonate with many, but I find it offensive that Github praises and benefits so much from open source, yet is not open source itself. This has bothered me for many years. Now this post from Nat, talking about how open source literally changed his life and made all things possible (which I agree with), bothers me even more. How can you say such things when your actions are s…

GitHub has helped to maintain git itself for years, in addition to creating and open-sourcing libgit2, a massive engineering effort, which ironically, GitLab is built on.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#175
Nat Friedman as CEO has mostly placated my knee jerk reaction of RUN! Really happy with how this is going so far.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#176

I understand that Microsoft has handled some software they've acquired badly (Skype), but is the Microsoft of today not vastly different from the Microsoft of that day? I don't think this will be the downward spiral that some people think it will be. Time will tell though.

I actually have some hope that people will hold them to a higher standard because of their past failings.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#178
Looking for answers to these questions from previous threads:

1. If you want to develop software for Microsoft’s Linux distro/kernel (Azure Sphere for IoT), it appears you must use Windows 10 + Visual Studio, https://seeedstudio.com/productDetail/3052 & https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/developing-an-azure-s...

> To use MT3620 Dev Board for Azure Sphere, you’ll need a Windows 10 PC with the latest Windows Updates, along with the Visual Studio Tools for Azure Sphere (which will be available for download from Microsoft). These tools will include application templates, development tools and the Azure Sphere software development kit (SDK). Terms: This development board can be only used for prototyping, it cannot be built into a product for commercial distribution. It cannot be re-sold or used as part of a production environment.

Since IoT is one of the “next big things”, it would be nice to use Microsoft Linux ARM kernel with open hardware (no terms of service for hardware resale) and open software (e.g. use open-source Linux dev tools with the Azure SDK. Will this be an option?

2. What is Microsoft’s position on EU upload filters for copyright screening of code uploaded to Github? Has Microsoft taken a public position on this issue? Does Microsoft currently use upload filters for open source code screening?

https://blog.github.com/2018-03-14-eu-proposal-upload-filter...

Re: Hello, GitHub

#179
I think my main concern going forward would be a diaspora of open source projects.

One of the neat things about Github is that a ton of open-source projects can be found there. Regardless of how Github operates going forward for individual users, I would be surprised if projects like Facebook's React or Google's Angular remained on a platform controlled by Microsoft.

Those are only two examples in a sea of OSS projects, so maybe the impact will be smaller than I think.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#180
post #7

I’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…

I agree, my biggest concerns are: 1. What is happening to Atom? I have tried VS code and don't really like it due to the difference in how the 2 systems are designed to work (Atom being more "plugins are king", VSCode being more "kitchen sink included by first-party"). I'd hate to see my favorite editor lose it's major backing. If MS makes a commitment to continue to develop Atom, or they work with someone else to "t…

> There's definitely major benefits for diversity in this area (meaning not having the vast majority of projects on one platform), but I'm hoping we (as developers in whole) don't throw the baby out with the bathwater here.

Perhaps tooling can help with this. Github, Bitbucket, and Gitlab (and I presume some of the lesser used solutions out there) all support some type of forking and pull request model, even though that's not core git. An abstraction layer atop that can hopefully obviate a hard dependency on one platform.

Post reply on HN