131–140 of 210 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd consider Gnome a pretty serious product. https://www.gnome.org/news/2018/05/gnome-moves-to-gitlab-2/ ok. so they weren't on github. GOSH!
FYI, Nat Friedman, co-founder of GNOME, is now the Microsoft employee who is the CEO of GitHub.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Absolutely useless question Sure > and should not be asked. None of your business.
I thought we are supposed to be sharing our opinions on HN with respect. Since when is stating my opinion on an opinion-based community none of my business? I am saying these questions should not be asked. Please provide a counter argument.
More importantly, it's an ama, and the fact that he is about to be github CEO is secondary. We don't want movie stars coming there just for their latest release (if you overdo it, it's a disaster. Google Rampart AMA)
Finally, my intention was to be brief, but stop short of disrespect (and I am sorry if it offended you). Unfortunately I seem to have approached you with the same condescension you showed for (I)AMA's users
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft already has VSTS which has source hosting, CI, issue tracking, kanban, release management and more. I suspect acquiring GitHub was more about the developer mind-share than the technology.
Are you sure that VSTS will live more than two more years? I'd suspect that Microsoft will eventually want to integrate GitHub with their CI and get rid of TFS (of which VSTS is just a hosted version) entirely. I don't know if you've used TFS/VSTS but it's not exactly user-friendly and well designed. Especially their CI configuration is horrendous.
But bear in mind, extremely long-term support for business workflows is Microsoft's obsession: Even if they decided to "retire" VSTS, it'd probably get updates for the next decade or so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, good point. You could probably do that in a weekend I bet.
Ironic perhaps? Cloning the Github interface would take thousands of man hours at least. Still completely negligible compared to $7.5 billion, but certainly not a weekend project.
Microsoft 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.
I don't know if GitHub going open source is likely or even beneficial, but imagine if they chose to develop an open standard for PR/issue/comment data. The easiest way to show you are going to play fair and win via quality and trust is to make it easy for people to leave. IMHO, that's where I'd push for/encourage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd consider Gnome a pretty serious product. https://www.gnome.org/news/2018/05/gnome-moves-to-gitlab-2/ ok. so they weren't on github. GOSH!
FYI, Nat Friedman, co-founder of GNOME, is now the Microsoft employee who is the CEO of GitHub.
Nat was a cofounder in the same way that Jeb Bush was a US president. Connected to one perhaps but not one himself.
> 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Little things like this build more trust with me than all the carefully written press release blogs ever could.
I think this falls under “I want a president I would have a beer with”, you’re judging something by a bad metric.
Nat is being really smart here. It should not backfire unless he acts pedantic or insults Redditors intelligence. I think that both are unlikely. Maybe Nat is trying to counteract any PR damage to GitHub, or maybe he just wants to see how much can skyrocket his account's karma. If I was in his situation I will be happy doing it for both reasons.
(and yes, I destroyed the account I did an AMA on a while back as well.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft already has VSTS which has source hosting, CI, issue tracking, kanban, release management and more. I suspect acquiring GitHub was more about the developer mind-share than the technology.
Are you sure that VSTS will live more than two more years? I'd suspect that Microsoft will eventually want to integrate GitHub with their CI and get rid of TFS (of which VSTS is just a hosted version) entirely. I don't know if you've used TFS/VSTS but it's not exactly user-friendly and well designed. Especially their CI configuration is horrendous.