Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 255 posts

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#221

Post by dijit »

batbomb wrote: post #220
dijit wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t oauth help here?

1. Who is the OAuth provider? 2. What does the registration process look like? OAuth helps with federated authentication. It's not federated registration.

1. Whoever you want, as long as the remote service supports them, github is common. So is the official gitlab.com

2. Click “sign in with provider” log in as normal, or just get logged in if you have a cookie.

3. These are functionally identical, it’s 2 clicks to create an account on gitlab if you use an external identity provider.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#222

Post by ebg13 »

jordigh wrote: post #219
ebg13 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that pixelfed... 1) Is not even close to Flickr. It's way more like Instagram, which is an entirely different and unrelated thing. 2) Barely has docs. Everything just says "to do". 3) Doesn't even have a website! pixelfed.org just says "coming soon" since last year. It has 400 different language translations though, all telling you the same nothing. How is that in any way superior? Flickr lets you organize you…

Alright, everything sucks, there's no hope, never mind.

MediaGoblin was the hope. It sounds like it might not have lost its developers if it hadn't gotten massively sidetracked by all the social networking federation stuff that was honestly always completely off brand for something that isn't a Twitter clone. You can't do anything about that now, of course, but putting it in a more accessible forge than Savannah might be a good start.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#223

Post by im3w1l »

gstein67 wrote: post #217
im3w1l wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They give up their autonomy in moderation - Github will now have the power to say "you are not allowed to contribute to Apache projects". This will lead to a) Github will have leverage over the project. b) They make themselves vulnerable to the outrage du jour. If an outrage mob forms against someone in the Apache Project, Github may kick them off their platform - they are known to have done so in the past. Apache wi…

That is simply not true. Please take your conspiracy theories elsewhere. Apache maintains clones of all our GitHub org's repositories. GitHub has no leverage over our repositories. We have a fallback mechanism for contributors to push to our server, if they deny GitHub T&Cs. Apache has the support of GitHub and Microsoft, from the CEOs of both, and through the organizations. -- Greg Stein

I don't think it's a conspiracy theory, these things happen all the time.

I'm very glad to hear of the fallback mechanism.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#224

Post by skybrian »

wDcBKgt66V8WDs wrote: post #41
im3w1l wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They give up their autonomy in moderation - Github will now have the power to say "you are not allowed to contribute to Apache projects". This will lead to a) Github will have leverage over the project. b) They make themselves vulnerable to the outrage du jour. If an outrage mob forms against someone in the Apache Project, Github may kick them off their platform - they are known to have done so in the past. Apache wi…

To all you who think this idea is unfounded or dramatic, remember that this is the entire point of FOSS. Whether this idea holds water is irrelevant, it's aligned to FOSS and it's strange that they don't appear to care or have valued other things over it.

Even if it were true, this isn't the "entire point", or at least not to everyone. You're talking about communities that have diverse interests, and only a subset of those people are into avoiding all dependency on commercial software in the FSF or Debian sense.

"FOSS" includes Windows developers, Mac developers, iOS developers, Java developers, people working for bigtech corporations, and some bigtech firms themselves. (Some parts of these firms some of the time, anyway.)

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#225

Post by judge2020 »

jeena wrote: post #154

I guess GitHub right now is like Facebook was in 2012, everybody is on it, it's a super vibrant community, it's backed by a huge amount of money, it locks you in (at least with wiki, issues, URLs). And a second guess is that it will also do what Facebook does, getting out of control by trying to monetize on its monopoly. It's just so mega ironic that the whole Open Source movement collectively decided that for a litt…

Note that the wiki can be cloned and moved to any static file host (just a bunch of markdown files):

    git clone https://github.com/github/VisualStudio.wiki.git

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#226

Post by jordigh »

ebg13 wrote: post #222
jordigh wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright, everything sucks, there's no hope, never mind.

MediaGoblin was the hope. It sounds like it might not have lost its developers if it hadn't gotten massively sidetracked by all the social networking federation stuff that was honestly always completely off brand for something that isn't a Twitter clone. You can't do anything about that now, of course, but putting it in a more accessible forge than Savannah might be a good start.

Well, go ahead:

git clone https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/mediagoblin.git

Put it on github and see how everything starts to get better.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#227

Post by CraftThatBlock »

lucb1e wrote: post #208
neurotrace wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently moved to a company that uses Jira. What kinds of problems should I be looking out for?

We use Jira in a very small company and I avoid it when possible. Wrote a command line hours tracker, that saves 1/3rd of my usage. Maybe I'll write an issues CRUD application some time as well, but I think going further down that rabbit hole costs more time than it saves. My previous employer was a little larger (some 40 employees) and I can say that Jira solves nothing that we couldn't solve much better with text f…

I'm at a company which we have hundreds of Jira users, and for us, it works quite well.

It's really about how the team/department uses Jira, how it's setup, and the overall process.

My last company we were ~30, and it was a total mess (although we were only ~3 developers). It's really about how it's setup.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#228

Post by kazinator »

dblock wrote: post #127
colbyrussell wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Easy" like: git diff master..bugfix > bugfix.patch # or `format-patch` # now attach/upload bugfix.patch Instead of: # make sure you click around github.com to create third fork git remote add unnecessary-third-fork $THIRDFORK git push unnecessary-third-fork bugfix firefox $THIRDFORK # now click around to file a PR # now wait for your PR to be merged # now click around on github.com to delete $THIRDFORK # ... unless…

I used patches and lists before, a lot. It was either hard or impossible to track more than one at a time, in context and with lots of conversations around specific lines of code. It was also a nightmare for maintainers to constantly want to tell people to rebase their patches based on other people's patches. To link patches to other patches to issues, etcetera. The Github website and its fork/pull request flow has i…

Patches sucked, so Torvalds switched to BitKeeper and then wrote Git.

If my project uses Git, I can easily accept a patch. If someone happens to give me a patch against some old version that doesn't apply to HEAD, I can just "git reset --hard" the HEAD that version, apply the patch, and then rebase with "git rebase".

I would expect most people to be making patches out of their own git repo (using "git format-patch") anyway; they should be able to rebase first.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#229

Post by kazinator »

dmitriid wrote: post #186
username223 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally I would be hard pressed to bother contributing to a project not on GitHub at this point. Personally I find it a pain to deal with github-only projects. Why should I have to sign up to a social network for coders when I could just send a patch to the development mailing list? It's more depressing than surprising that Microsoft paid $7.5B for that.

Why should I have to sign up to potentially dozens of mailing lists to track the projects I’m interested in when I can track them all in ine place with that ne login?

That's a good question. Part of the answer is that a properly run mailing list doesn't require subscription in order for you to post a question or a patch, and also keeps you in the loop (i.e. lets you receive the replies to your posting) by avoiding "reply-to header munging". The barrier of having to subscribe to lists is just a quick and lazy anti-spam measure that decreases usability for everyone.

So that is to say, mailing lists in their original inception didn't require "tracking" as a prerequisite for engagement. They were really just re-mailing robots: you write a message to a robot, and it sends it to others. Those others do "reply all", so that you receive the reply even though the robot doesn't have you in the list. The robot stays in the loop because it is CC'd, and so the list subscribers can track the discussion.

When I have some question, or want to report a bug, I don't actually want to track all of the activities in that project's mailing list. It is rude to expect that of me. And anyway, there are web archives of mailing lists!

All the mailing lists that I operate are in this classic open manner.

Re: Apache Software Foundation joins GitHub open source community

#230

Post by kazinator »

meddlepal wrote: post #66
svnpenn wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is simply not true. While I strongly agree that GitHub has the current "best" workflow, other styles do get the job done. The Git project itself, the Cygwin project and Gawk project all use primarily mailing lists. Again while I prefer the GitHub system all 3 of these projects are responsive to emails and changes are made quickly.

What exactly is not true about my entirely personal statement? I simply find barrier to entry for non-GitHub projects to be too high for me to bother. Great if you disagree and I'm sure there are some others, but I would be willing to be you're the minority.

So after how many minutes do you give up chasing a bug?

How big of a barrier is writing tests or documentation?

Or setting up the whole environment to actually build something pulled from Github?

You know that some Github projects have nasty things in them like Makefiles, and all that code and configuration requries tedious text editing.

Post reply on HN