It's interesting to hear this. If you were on HN the past week, it might have seemed from all the front page articles that GitHub was about to implode due to an an exodus to GitLab.
I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
11–20 of 210 posts
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#12Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#13What would you rather fight - a horse sized duck, or 100 duck sized horses? Hope he answers that one.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#14It would be a great PR move and an amazing build of trust.
I don't know why Github was not open source to begin with.
Why do companies still think source code is a big deal? This is not Google Search or some advanced AI.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#15> That said, the GitHub team reports that the set of users who have migrated or closed their accounts is extremely small, and this is more than made up for by the surge of new signups and new interest in GitHub this week. It's interesting to hear this. If you were on HN the past week, it might have seemed from all the front page articles that GitHub was about to implode due to an an exodus to GitLab.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#16> That said, the GitHub team reports that the set of users who have migrated or closed their accounts is extremely small, and this is more than made up for by the surge of new signups and new interest in GitHub this week. It's interesting to hear this. If you were on HN the past week, it might have seemed from all the front page articles that GitHub was about to implode due to an an exodus to GitLab.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#17Microsoft should just make Github open source. It would be a great PR move and an amazing build of trust. I don't know why Github was not open source to begin with. Why do companies still think source code is a big deal? This is not Google Search or some advanced AI.
Microsoft bought GitHub for over seven billion dollars. You don't buy something for that kind of cash unless it has that kind of value. Saying they 'should' do something as though there is a problem is silly. Engineers here on HN are so quick to say what someone "needs to do" something... but in response to what? What problem are you identifying? A vocal minority of engineers have complained about the acquisition, meanwhile GitHub has 28 million users. Most of those users don't care that this happened.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#18> That said, the GitHub team reports that the set of users who have migrated or closed their accounts is extremely small, and this is more than made up for by the surge of new signups and new interest in GitHub this week. It's interesting to hear this. If you were on HN the past week, it might have seemed from all the front page articles that GitHub was about to implode due to an an exodus to GitLab.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#19What would you rather fight - a horse sized duck, or 100 duck sized horses? Hope he answers that one.
Re: I’m Nat Friedman, Future CEO of GitHub. AMA
#20He seems to be playing the typical corporate lackey role. His comments are all full of condescension, platitudes, and corpspeak. He sounds more like a PR person than a principled leader. He's saying exactly what he thinks his audience wants to hear. It's not surprising that he thrived as a Microsoft exec.
That he's willing to make promises about GitHub's future is also telling. He's the "CEO" of a company owned by another company. He can be fired and replaced at the first hint of disagreement with Microsoft execs. He can't afford to rock the boat at all and he knows it. So he's being dishonest or naive when he makes these promises. A more honest or aware person would make this distinction clear.
Microsoft ruining GitHub over the next few years will be a good thing for open source. There was never anything ideal about relying on a highly centralized proprietary service. GitHub made it work but Microsoft will reveal the inherent weakness of this situation.