Great to hear that! One last thing that would make Github a better alternative to Gitlab for teams is the self-hosted runners for organizations IMO.
GitHub is now free for teams
171–180 of 664 posts
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey Nat, thank you so much for this! We're a small team from India and we love Github but were always conflicted due to the pricing. The new flat price of $4/user seems perfect for us. I've already moved one private repo to our org account. Thanks again ^_^
Just curious what motivates you to pick the $4 plan over free? None of the features there are really deal-breaking for most orgs. - Required reviewers - 3,000 Actions minutes/month (Free for public repositories) - 2GB of GitHub Packages storage (Free for public repositories) - Code owners
If you check the extended breakdown down the https://github.com/pricing page below the marketing bits, lots of features are not available on private repos unless you're paying for a Teams plan. Depending how you use github it could be an issue:
* protected branches
* codeowners
* draft PRs
* pages and wikis
* multiple assignees (PRs and issues)
* required reviews & status checks
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
could you elaborate further with use-cases?
Not having to create separate usernames and passwords with yet another service (GitHub)
With GitHub (cloud version) specifically it doesn't (currently) work that way, you still need a "normal" GitHub username and password, and you do the organisational SAML login in regular intervals when trying to access that org's resources. I'm not aware of this being a widespread way of doing SAML, but I guess it supports certain use-cases (like keeping a GitHub identity despite switching jobs/OSS projects).
sources:
* https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-or...
* https://help.github.com/en/github/authenticating-to-github/a...
[edit: formatting]
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
SAML (and 2FA to a lesser extent) comes with some serious support burdens on the companies offering it. There's a long tail of more or less broken SAML implementations on both the service and identity provider sides, provisioning issues, configuration issues, "Sally can't login on Tuesdays" issues, duplicated slightly-inconsistent data in IdP and Service side records issues... If you as a SaaS provider outsource your…
This doesn't make sense. Login of any kind can be a tricky problem, you need to handle passwords, rate limits, email verification, password resets, etc. In most popular web frameworks there are libraries you can drop-in that handle all of this for you (like Devise in rails). There are drop-in libraries like OmniAuth (again for ruby/rails) to make handling multiple types of Oauth login simple. The same could clearly b…
Passwords, rate limits, resets, etc. are the same for everyone, and so are the problems and the solutions to those.
SAML on the other hand is different for each organization. Providers pay Auth0 and the like to have developers on staff who know the pitfalls and quirks of ADFS 3.0 on Windows Server 2012 R2, so they don't have to. Dealing with a single Okta as IdP integration is like the absolute best-case scenario there is. There is also zero consistency in what actual data IdPs returns out of the box to the SPs, so now you're walking the customer's admin through setting up the proper attribute mappings, etc.
I also very much disagree that SAML is a net security benefit, at least directly. It's for convenience, top-down visibility and control into what people are using, de-provisioning services, onboarding and offboarding users at scale etc. e.g. problems that only big companies have. Many SAML implementations are just as likely to add truck-sized security holes to the service provider when done poorly, and a lot of them are done poorly.
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#175Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Everyone at GitHub is really excited about this announcement, and I'm happy to answer any questions. We've wanted to make this change for the last 18 months, but needed our Enterprise business to be big enough to enable the free use of GitHub by the rest of the world. I'm happy to say that it's grown dramatically in the last year, and so we're able to make GitHub free for teams that don'…
Thanks for doing this. Is this effective immediately now? I tried to downgrade to free just now but it's giving me a giant list of features I'd lose if I continue. Also any change to Data pack pricing for LFS Data? Due to the on-going Pandemic, I've been trying to cut business costs left and right. Github Team was one of those I wanted to cut but it's also so important that I couldn't decide easily. So thanks again f…
It is effective immediately. There is a full FAQ here: https://help.github.com/en/github/getting-started-with-githu... Essentially, "Pro" = Team - the only difference is whether it is an individual account or an organizational account. We'll work to clarify this on the site.
No, there has not been any change to the data pack pricing for LFS data.
Glad this will help you continue building on GitHub!
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#176I think GitHub are doing well, but one cannot deny that GitLab has carved out a fantastic niche (on-prem, private instances, OSS, etc) that GitHub doesn't compete in. So while I agree GitHub are "the" company to beat, I think GitLab is doing a good job of contrasting. PS - No affiliation with anyone.
> "PS - No affiliation with anyone." Sure, that's why the throwaway account.
Account created in 2014 with 33.5k karma...hardly seems like a throwaway account.
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#177Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Everyone at GitHub is really excited about this announcement, and I'm happy to answer any questions. We've wanted to make this change for the last 18 months, but needed our Enterprise business to be big enough to enable the free use of GitHub by the rest of the world. I'm happy to say that it's grown dramatically in the last year, and so we're able to make GitHub free for teams that don'…
Hi, any reason to still have a restriction on number of free bot accounts one may have (currently one)? There are limitations in products built on GitHub that require you to create multiple accounts if you don't want to share tokens between repositories (bad idea security wise): https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io/issues/849#issuecomme...
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#178Thank in large part to GitLab for pushing the market forward on affordable collaborative development.
We moved across when GH did their pricing changed. Free CI/CD well before "actions". Never looked back.
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
I might buy the conspiracy theory except for the fact that Azure DevOps exists and provides all the features of GitHub already with none of the restrictions you've mentioned except that you pay for the service.
Can it really be called a conspiracy theory when there is proof that MS has done this same sort of thing in the past? Past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior. Saying that someone has been shown to do something in the past, therefore it is likely that they will do the same thing in the future doesn't seem to qualify as a conspiracy theory.
It should also be noted that conspiracy theory != false. There are numerous examples of real conspiracies throughout history.
Re: GitHub is now free for teams
#180Sounds like Microsoft is creating a new branch attempting to replicate the Atlassian business model. First get developers hooked on GitHub, then build GitHub integrations into enterprise software, then let developers make the sale to their own employers (primarily because developers like the little green activity boxes).