Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 20 posts

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#11
> Note the upgrade is a one-way process.

It reminds me migrating own GitHub repo Travis CI from https://travis-ci.org to https://travis-ci.com, which is also one-way process.

Some of my repo older still use travis-ci.org (ORG domain is cool here), but all new GitHub repos could be linked only to travis-ci.com (COM domain little terrible)

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#12

Yup, nobody in all the announcements or any other articles mentioning this new "github" has mentioned the WIKI (which is part of Gitlab) is not included in the free part of Github ... this is kind of critical IMHO

Really, the wiki is one of the worst features. Markdown based docs are far better and actually part of the repository

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#13

Have you contacted their customer support? I wonder if the data is still there, or can be recovered out somehow.

>contacted their customer suppor

The fact that this is even necessary just screams monumental f up.

Here is a free upgrade. (With surprise data loss)

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#15

Yup, nobody in all the announcements or any other articles mentioning this new "github" has mentioned the WIKI (which is part of Gitlab) is not included in the free part of Github ... this is kind of critical IMHO

Really, the wiki is one of the worst features. Markdown based docs are far better and actually part of the repository

The project I work on uses both: In-repo docs as the authoritative/reference on the software, and the wiki as a collaboration tool with a low barrier of entry to users adding things.

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#16
post #9
post #4

But it is documented and from the very beginning. If you look at this page https://github.com/pricing in the comparison table under Pages and Wiki it clearly says "Public repositories". I'm guessing you had a private one. I've also moved from Pro to Free Teams and I've seen this from the start.

if you mean "clearly" by it shows a checkmark beside "wikis" and if you click a chevron to expand the paragraph and find it says "for public repos" then sure.

What are you talking about? There is no checkmark. Just the text https://fally.ro/screenshots/chrome_q9YExThjo9.png

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#17

Yup, nobody in all the announcements or any other articles mentioning this new "github" has mentioned the WIKI (which is part of Gitlab) is not included in the free part of Github ... this is kind of critical IMHO

Really, the wiki is one of the worst features. Markdown based docs are far better and actually part of the repository

We have non-developers so they can handle markdown but not much beyond that ... having a website where they can type stuff (this is just like wikipedia) helps us get them onboarded .. then they also can help with the issues, etc.

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#18
I'm the PM on Wiki at GitLab - sorry to hear this happened to you! If you ever did consider moving to our free tier at GitLab, our GitHub Importer (in the docs) should handle importing the whole project including the wiki. You'd still need access to your GitHub wiki though so can't say for sure.

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#19

Have you contacted their customer support? I wonder if the data is still there, or can be recovered out somehow.

You could try cloning your wiki using this method https://gist.github.com/hanxue/8488564. It's worth a shot - it may be possible that the user still has permission to clone.

Re: Tell HN: GitHub Organizations not as free as it seems

#20
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, you should store wiki pages as .md files in a /wiki folder in your repo, regardless of your git repo hosting provider. I'm positive wiki pages are stored in a separate git repo alongside your code, anyway. The more that lives in the codebase itself, the better -- ideally this would not only include wiki pages, but also issues, comments, PR threads, etc.

Github treats wikis as another git repository. I regularly use this to backup the wikis I have on github. If your project is named `username/repository` then your wiki can be cloned at `git clone git@github.com:username/repository.wiki.git`.

This approach is something I never quite figured out. What is the point of documenting your project in another repository? Based on what OP just explained this is one of the only explanations I can come up with (GitHub treats this as an extra that you must pay for).
Post reply on HN