91–100 of 193 posts
Why are people jumping ship to lower quality services ? And I'm talking about unrecognizable brand names, because at least migrating to Gitlab or Bitbucket may be understandable in a way, but still an exageration in my opinion.
because at best (or actually worst?) MS will slowly boil you like that frog.
* https://gitea.io/en-US/ The code for gitea is on Github. https://github.com/go-gitea/ * http://gitprep.yukikimoto.com/ The code for gitprep is on Github https://github.com/yuki-kimoto/gitprep * https://gogs.io/ Guess what ..... https://github.com/gogs/gogs
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks! gogs looked great until I was horrified it has no oauth plugin support?! gitea does. why the fork? seems awkward.
The fork happened years ago because Gogs was (not entirely sure of current status) managed by a single person who would disappear on the regular, leaving fixes and other things not merged for weeks. So it got forked by people who were contributing to Gogs, and I think that ended up pushing Gogs into more active development. Now the two projects are still very similar but diverged enough to have some important differe…
I’m only half joking when I say VSTS is a pretty strong contender in the code+issues space, especially if you need more complex features for CI/CD. For obvious reasons it’s not a good option if you are switching from Github out of fear of Microsoft (which is presumably the reason it’s not listed in the article).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fixing an imago set by a guy calling open-source and Linux 'a cancer' is really hard. The last few years of changes doesn't magically wipe away that bitter taste, and the last 10-20 years doesn't magically make you forget the past.
It's an interesting debate though. If the CEO and most of the major execs of a company have left, is it really worthwhile to factor statements made 17 years ago into your decision making process? Don't get me wrong, many will avoid MS-anything to punish them for their past conduct, which is a fair personal decision. But if you're trying to evaluate what MS will do in the future, I'm not sure how relevant 2001 is.
So past CEOs can make a lasting impact, and in many ways it works out badly because the negative comments get the most attention.
Where Apple, according to some louder fans is not as good as it was under Jobs, for Microsoft under Nadella the inverse is true: according to the haters, just because it looks better now doesn't mean the (to them) bad years are gone.
Generalising, no matter what direction a transition takes (good to bad or bad to good), it's always the loud messages pointing out the bad past or bad future that gets the most attention and influences choices the most.
It's almost like trust between people: doing things right 99% of the time but doing one thing wrong once always makes that 99% of 'good' disappear and only the bad is taken as the 'true' value. In the extreme: lie once, and you are a liar. Even if you are 99 years old and have never lied before. That one time, once, will be what defines you as 'bad', and the rest does not outweigh it. Of course in reality that extreme example is not super likely, but nevertheless, it should carry the point I'm attempting to make ;-)
It's not the sum, aggregate or balance that seems to count, only how 'bad' your 'badness' is.
You and I use Github not because we don’t know the alternatives, but because Github is better
"A couple of years ago Microsoft was anti-open-source." The quote is from 2001 as is Ballmer's quote. Closing the article due to its lack of objectivity.
For all the complaints about Microsoft, I've yet to hear what they could do that would be so bad? Change the homepage to actually be useful? Improve the search? Give away free private repos?
Kill Atom was the most reasonable fear I heard. And I can’t see how that wouldn’t be a well founded fear. If I was Microsoft I wouldn’t want to keep paying devs to make two so similar products (atom, code). They are much more similar than e.g code/vs or github/vsts. But even so: I agree the fear that the product will be worse in a few feels completely irrational. What I can agree with is that it’s unfortunate that it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was alive when Microsoft was evil and I don't want my stuff to stay in a Microsoft service. I moved my pulic repositories to GitLab today. It's slower and it doesn't looks as nice but it's ok. I self host my private repositories, no need of a third party service for that. By the way, Bitbucket looks a little better than GitLab but its usability is abysmal. I always have troubles finding the things I want in there.
GitLab runs on Microsoft Azure. :)
I am a happy gitlab.com user. However, with all of this week's news I decided to see what it would take to run my own GitLab instance. I was surprised to find that on Digital Ocean and AWS Lightsail the one-click GitLab installs required an instance that costs ~$40 per month just for me, one user. Any cheaper/smaller instances were to anemic to run GitLab at all. Seems like there are some performance issues to deal w…
GitLab is a Rails app, what did you expect? /s We use gitea (written in Go), it runs well on more modest hardware.