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

351–360 of 664 posts

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#351

Post by vesinisa »

binarymax wrote: post #346

The way I read the title and heading, it sounded like teams was now free. This messaging is very confusing. Teams is not being made free, you need to pay $4 per user. A better message would be: "we're reducing your price to $4pp, and giving you access to more features."

Ugh.. did you notice that they also changed what the Free plan includes? Many of the premium features, including unlimited private repos for an org, are now included in the free plan.

I am actually going through the list and thinking my company might be able to do with the free plan from now on.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#353

Post by dang »

taytus wrote: post #165
Someone1234 wrote: post #129

I 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.

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#354

Post by MrStonedOne »

jfoster wrote: post #153
natfriedman wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private repos are not subject to our Community Guidelines on public content, so no, we don't enforce the same rules there: https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-communi... I wasn't aware of SS13, and will look into what happened there. Content moderation at GitHub scale is hard and sometimes mistakes are made.

Do public repos that get banned have access cut off, or are they just forcibly made private?

Access is cut off in our case (ss13), i don't know if that's different in user owned repos vs org owned repos.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#355

Post by danpalmer »

adverbly wrote: post #291
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…

> Great news for everyone Not true. The new Team plan will be a downgrade in specs from the old teams plan. For example it only includes 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...

You can buy extra build minutes. The missing 7k minutes would cost $56, which means teams with 12 or more devs who are using the full 10k minutes will be better off. Smaller teams using more than 10k will be worse off.

It’s probably great news for the vast majority of teams.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#356

Post by user5994461 »

tptacek wrote: post #237
closeparen wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about OpenID Connect? That seems a lot simpler, and also has open source implementations that aren't too intimidating.

It's not a technology problem. Integration with "foreign" SSOs is complicated no matter what protocol you use, with lots of corner cases and support costs, but these features are expensive for the same reason that single-day-turnaround short-notice flights between Chicago and NYC tend to be expensive: the people who want them have money to spend on them, and it isn't their money. That money pays for the cheap seats e…

SAML is a technology problem, on top of all other problems.

The messages are under specified and overcomplicated, doing incredibly obscure stuff (XML signing and canonization for one) that nobody can understand and implement. That's mainly why it's so hard to use and there is so little support from libraries.

As security researcher, we could nitpick all days on security being hard, no matter the solution. It is factually true but it doesn't help developers, fact is, developers would be better off ignoring SAML and going with OIDC instead.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#357

Post by dang »

binarymax wrote: post #346

The way I read the title and heading, it sounded like teams was now free. This messaging is very confusing. Teams is not being made free, you need to pay $4 per user. A better message would be: "we're reducing your price to $4pp, and giving you access to more features."

Normally we'd change the title to be less confusing, but in this case it's a bit tricky, for reasons I've explained here: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#358

Post by carapace »

leadingthenet wrote: post #179
irrational wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've read that more than half of government/regime changes that happened in the 20th century were the result of some kind of coup. In other words, conspiracy is the norm.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#359

Post by Saaster »

Haegin wrote: post #336
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…

It's a paid service, but AWS Cognito supports SAML in a similar way to Okta/Auth0 but with a much lower initial cost (you just pay a reasonable rate for what you use, not multiple thousands of dollars to get it up and running). I used it to build a SAML integration at the end of last year and have been pretty happy with it so far.

I've looked at Cognito in depth, and it seems like an abandoned service. Hundreds of open issues that got rolled into the Amplify issue tracker, with little to no response. It lacks some pretty basic SAML capabilities, like IdP-initiated logins. If your customers want to put you as an icon in their Okta dashboard or whatever, can't do it. They reported that as being "on their roadmap" in 2017.

It does work for the basic use cases, so I would still consider that an better option than rolling your own for the average service provider.

Post reply on HN