281–290 of 664 posts
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'…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Glad you like the Student Developer Pack. All credit goes to the 100+ partners who provide something like $200k in tools and services to each student who qualifies for the pack. It's kind of mind-boggling, actually. As for how we sustain ourselves -- lots of big enterprise customers!
Good point. For anyone using the Student Developer Pack (or any other similar student offer), ask yourself this: Do you really want to become reliant on software and services that will cost you ~$70k/year as soon as you graduate? Well, unless they decide to switch market or shut down, in which case you're hosed no matter how much you're willing to pay.
For sure this is to the benefit of the involved companies. But paying for good tooling is normal not strange. When you go to your local handyman he will tell you a lot about good and expensive tools.
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…
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…
It's also worth pointing out that it doesn't have to come from malicious intentions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Content moderation at GitHub scale is hard and sometimes mistakes are made. This is completely fair, but lack of transparency makes it significantly more frustrating.
Transparency can give bad actors a way to game and workaround the system.
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),…
You want Keycloak - https://www.keycloak.org/ - then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're living with transparent juridical system and it works fine. Imagine that you could be thrown to jail without explaining a reason. That would be outrageous.
> transparent juridical system and it works fine Yeah, criminals are always arrested and convicted. /s It's a balance. With something as essential as human rights and personal freedom, people (tend to) err on the safe side. Online moderation can err on the other side, since consequences are relatively modest. If you get banned on GH, move to Gitlab or host your own, that's hardly a tragedy.
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…
So far Microsoft isn’t taking customers away from AWS. They’re just expanding the total market. But I do wonder if AWS will try to buy gitlab.
The new plan is a downgrade from the old one. For example, it will only include 3000 Github Action minutes. The old plan included 10000. The next plan up would be > 2 * old price.
Source: https://github.com/pricing vs http://web.archive.org/web/20200406010552/https://github.com...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still get a Pro option when going to https://github.com/account/upgrade from a free account, and it seems to match Teams, here's the blurb: > Required reviewers in private repos > Protected branches in private repos > Repository insights in private repos > Wikis in private repos > Pages in private repos > Code owners in private repos > 3,000 minutes for GitHub Actions > 2GB of storage for packages
Thanks for the confirmation, that’s what I figured. It would be nice to see this laid out somewhere public, preferably the pricing page, not gated behind a free account.