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

GitHub is now free for teams

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 664 posts

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#271

Post by toyg »

shrikant wrote: post #29

Google haven't built up too much of a user base for GCP's Cloud Source Repositories service yet (my speculation), so I wonder if they're viewing Gitlab as an acquisition target. TBQH, I don't see Gitlab lasting too much longer without an acquisition event of some sort, when facing up against this sort of Microsoft-backed feature funding. And I say this as a bigger user of Gitlab than Github (primarily because of the…

Gitlab need only wait before GH starts adding Azure-first and Azure-only features, as they are wont to do. At that point they can just offer "the same but for any other cloud provider". Amazon, Google, or IBM, might even throw them a bone.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#272

Post by vetinari »

cactus2093 wrote: post #147
Saaster wrote: post #88

Earlier 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…

> The problem is that the only organizations that would make this single issue of SSO support a deal-breaker are bigger companies who can afford to be upsold

That's not true. We are a tiny company (~10 ppl), but SAML, OIDC (or GSSAPI or Radius, if really necessary) support are a deal-breaker for anything we use.

We used to have separate accounts for everything we had. It became a drag, we had to solve it. Nowadays, either it can be integrated with SSO, or we will do without.

> so everyone treats this as an up-sell feature.

And that's the mistake.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#273

Post by toyg »

klinskyc wrote: post #3

Seems like Github is feeling heat from GitLab/BitBucket. I guess the calculation here is that the enterprise contracts are where all the money is, and keeping smaller customers on GitHub is worth the price cut?

Gitlab, yes. I don't see Bitbucket as much of a player (unless you're in the Atlassian ecosystem and you like it, which seems... rare).

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#274

Post by dflock »

sneak wrote: post #81
yingw787 wrote: post #8

Well, this is amazing! I never would have thought the Microsoft acquisition would have these kinds of results! Congrats to Nat and the GitHub team (and by extension Microsoft) for making this possible! I wonder whether this is a result of market conditions, or whether GitHub sees this is a first-to-market play of some sort, or whether it's something else. I hate to be a cynic given how much good Microsoft + GitHub ha…

I feel like anyone who lived through the 90s could have expected "these kinds of results". Git is open source and widely supported, which doesn't benefit Microsoft. By causing GitHub-specific features to be an essential part of a "modern" or "industry standard" git workflow, they can capture more marketshare/attention, and cause alternatives to be sidelined. This requires removing all friction to entering the proprie…

Microsoft have already stopped development of Atom, sadly.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#275

Post by Cthulhu_ »

underdeserver wrote: post #219
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transparency can give bad actors a way to game and workaround the system.

More likely, ammo in a potential legal battle between GitHub and the banned party.

So far it's been mostly small / independent developers or organizations that were banned, and Github has Microsoft behind it, a $125bn / year revenue company with a legal team 1,500 strong (https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2019/12/02/how-brad...). I don't think fear of litigation is the issue.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#276

Post by Someone1234 »

GordonS wrote: post #244
Someone1234 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean Microsoft's latest attempt at Web Forms/Silverlight, a product that yet again tries to muddy the separation between client and server execution contexts using magic. Seems like every generation re-invents this idea, and every time it fails for the same fatal flaw: Illusions are just that, and you'll wind up hacking around the illusion if you want to do something not envisioned (or run into a bug in the secre…

This is a really cynical take. I'm also not sure why you are conflating Silverlight with Web Forms - it was never competing with Web Forms, it was client-side only, a replacement to Flash - a better UI and API (at the time) than HTML/CSS/JS. Blazor is OSS , and doesn't work like Web Forms. As in your own quote, Blazor uses SignalR - which uses push-based comms, such as Web Sockets; Web Forms was standard HTTP.

> This is a really cynical take.

I was a Web Forms developers, I've earned at least that. Blazor absolutely does work like Web Forms, in terms of clientserver integration, just because it uses WebAssembly & SignalR instead of JavaScript & Ajax doesn't really change that but rather obfuscates it. Essentially it is just another set of abstractions attempting to paper over a real boundary.

> As in your own quote, Blazor uses SignalR - which uses push-based comms, such as Web Sockets; Web Forms was standard HTTP.

Which makes it even worse, if the client/server boundary wasn't muddied enough with with the unidirectional magic Web Forms used, now we have omnidirectional instead. As if that will make it less complicated and buggy.

Definitely put me in the "nay" category with Blazor. I've danced this exact tango with Microsoft twice before, and their obsession with making browsers desktop-like applications. WebAssembly is cool tech for one day, they're just abusing it for something that is an inherently bad idea.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#277

Post by compscistd »

pubby wrote: post #67
natfriedman wrote: post #26

Hi 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'…

Hey Nat glad to see you here. A few days ago one of the biggest team collaborative games (Space Station 13) got banned on GitHub without a public explanation from GitHub staff, but some suspect it was because the code contained bad words and slurs. Do you know if this is why the project was banned, and will these new private team repos be subject to the same terms/rules?

If it was the bad words/slurs, could that have been resolved by hiding them behind some basic string manipulation (ex. a caesar cipher)? I can see how GitHub wouldn't want a public repo to have objectionable words, but can't imagine the harm from obfuscating stored copy.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#278

Post by anderspitman »

mythz wrote: post #51

Great news for everyone bar startups competing with them as it looks like Microsoft is turning their multi-billion acquisition of GitHub into a loss leader to get as many devs using their platform as possible, no doubt to flex seamless integrations into Azure which looks like they're executing exceptionally well with their acquisitions & new feature giveaways. From the side-lines it looks like they're slowly becoming…

As a counterpoint, alternative options like Gitlab and Gitea seem to be doing pretty well.

I think the person who solves project discovery across all these services is going to make a killing.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#279

Post by snuxoll »

Saaster wrote: post #193
derefr wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like SAML needs the same "everyone gets together to make a FOSS implementation that knows about the weird quirks of all the implementations it interacts with" approach that e.g. the Samba project was founded upon.

I agree. There's a million SAML for Java/Python/Node.js/Foo libraries out there, all with a long list of issues and known cases that don't work correctly, security issues etc. but it's the wrong model in my opinion. Instead of directly bolting SAML into your app, I think a FOSS implementation of an independently running service is the way to go. You run the battle tested open source service (locally / in your cloud),…

Nod to Keycloak / Red Hat SSO here, it’s my goto solution for dealing with identity these days.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#280

Post by oaiey »

shishy wrote: post #260
SlavikCA wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious: since GitHub Pages intended to PUBLISH pages, why to make the repo PRIVATE?

Sometimes people want to keep the code, commits, etc. private but maintain a blog

Use a private repo, attach a code action to publish your output of your favourite blog to static html output to a public GitHub pages repo.
Post reply on HN