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

431–440 of 664 posts

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#431

Post by sytelus »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #123
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.

> 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.

No, it’s not fair. Banning a repo should be taken as seriously as banning a book. Living in a country that is US where github HQ is hosted, freedom of speech should be prized and cared for dearly. For a commercial company, there should be only one reason to ban a repo and that is to abide with a law. For even that company should do everything in its power to prevent that or provide a viable lawful alternative. This should be taken so seriously that each ban should have been reviewed at CEO level. GitHub CEO saying he has no clue, it’s a scale issue and “mistakes are made” is not really acceptable.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#432

Post by zaat »

Nullabillity wrote: post #398
zaat wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Visual Studio had to build their own Docker wrapper, because telling people to just use it directly would give their users a glimpse of the outside world, and we can't have that! Do you actually believe this was the reason behind developing Docker wrapper for VS? I mean you can always try stretching out the worst intention and motives, but do you actually believe this? Suppose you do, how do you think about the gaz…

> Do you actually believe this was the reason behind developing Docker wrapper for VS? I mean you can always try stretching out the worst intention and motives, but do you actually believe this? I don't think there is an explicit conspiracy. I do think there is a negative spiral where IDE addicts (for the lack of a better term) produce tools that "help" others avoid leaving their comfort zone. I'm not immune to it ei…

> I do think there is a negative spiral where IDE addicts (for the lack of a better term) produce tools that "help" others avoid leaving their comfort zone.

Alternatively, many people see value in focusing on what they develop and not have to bother studying the fine details of the underlying platforms they use. As someone who live deep down in detail and assist others using tools in the whole range from IDEs to cli, I have no disrespect for engineers who won't bother spending their time on knowing the subtitlities of the systems where their code will run.

>Bad analogy. Producing it would be closer to developing the blueprint.

Software tools are far from blueprints that are done once, they require constant maintenance to be compatible with changes in other tools and environments, bug and security fixing as well as implementing new features that users request.

Software development is extremely expensive, libre software is free only because someone is paying the cost of production and prefer to distribute it for free. Probably most of the open source software today is paid for by big companies, and their aim is usually to gain something from the investment. Docker wasn't developed as a manifestation of free speech, nor was Kubernetes born under GNU's roof. If not for the piles of money Google and Red Hat spent on it, Kubernetes couldn't be anything resembling the amazing beast that it is.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#433

Post by oaiey »

sdesol wrote: post #338
oaiey wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Amazon tried to go into the private hosting and ci/cd market, they are not a dev tool company. Microsoft was born as one. When Amazon or Google would buy GitLab they would meaningless integrate it, reduce staff by half and then ruin it over time. Maybe when Microsoft would have opened up some years earlier, Codeplex would not share the fate of Google Cloud.

> While Amazon tried to go into the private hosting and ci/cd market, they are not a dev tool company When did Amazon give up?

Oh sorry, I guess they did not. But their offerings are not really compelling outside AWS deployment.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#434

Post by DennisAleynikov »

crispinb wrote: post #396
DennisAleynikov wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

terrible question and off topic get political complaints out of here, github is a programming tool. doesn't matter if police use the same non lethal tools as normal citizens.

How far around your head do your political blinkers wrap? Would you be happy to write control programs for torture workstations?

whats stopping torture workstations from being managed with Kubernetes and Chef?

you could use any modern orchestration tools to replace humans running torture machinery. code only serves to automate human behavior not create new behavior that isn't just amplifications of humanities worst desires.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#435

Post by JohnBooty »

glenneroo wrote: post #369
tw04 wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google sure, but Microsoft? The company that kept the Zune service alive for 4 years after the product was EOL and with a userbase likely measured in the hundreds of thousands? https://www.wired.com/2015/09/what-to-do-with-your-zune-rip-... The company who STILL supports 16-bit apps? https://www.groovypost.com/howto/enable-16-bit-application-s... Ya... I would hardly say MS is known for killing stuff early - more lik…

Then again there is this list of 346 discontinued Microsoft products, some of which had very short lifespans: https://www.versionmuseum.com/history-of/discontinued-micros...

Yes, I would definitely hate to trust Microsoft with my enterprise software build pipeline because of how they refused to support Microsoft Bob.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#436

Post by richardwhiuk »

jjeaff wrote: post #226
wlll wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Github Enterprise is on-premises: https://github.com/enterprise That only really leaves the fact that its OSS that differentiates Gitlab in your list. Not comparing the two, just making sure you're aware.

But you can also run Gitlab on prem for free.

Only without costing TCO

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#437

Post by colinloretz »

bamboozled wrote: post #429
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'…

Excuse me for being cynical, but I read this announcement as: “Because nothing is truly free, we will be selling your data to pay for this new seemingly free service.” If this is what you’re doing, if the privacy policy changes, I’ll be very disappointed. How will this be funded? We’re customers actually against paying a small free to use the service?

Read his comment again. They are supporting the free plans with Github Enterprise.

> 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't need Enterprise features.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#438

Post by [deleted] »

bamboozled wrote: post #429
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'…

Excuse me for being cynical, but I read this announcement as: “Because nothing is truly free, we will be selling your data to pay for this new seemingly free service.” If this is what you’re doing, if the privacy policy changes, I’ll be very disappointed. How will this be funded? We’re customers actually against paying a small free to use the service?

[deleted]

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#439

Post by maa5444 »

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'…

it looks uncle Bill after the #shitstorm... wants to give some charms away ... enjoy lads ... I ll not

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#440

Post by batmenace »

bamboozled wrote: post #429
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'…

Excuse me for being cynical, but I read this announcement as: “Because nothing is truly free, we will be selling your data to pay for this new seemingly free service.” If this is what you’re doing, if the privacy policy changes, I’ll be very disappointed. How will this be funded? We’re customers actually against paying a small free to use the service?

Not sure how that's your takeaway from the announcement? Sounds more like they can cover the costs of hosting free plans from the revenue through enterprise customers, and so can attrack more customers without having to charge them
Post reply on HN