61–70 of 155 posts
Lots of speculation in the replies here with one common theme: No one seems to know, or has yet to define, what "social coding" actually means. Not even Github.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the issue is not with it being social in general, but rather with it becoming a similar flavour of social to the likes of Facebook, Twitter, etc. Github has always been a social tool without the need for a newsfeed-type thing.
> Github has always been a social tool without the need for a newsfeed-type thing. GitHub has always had various activity feeds. Here are two early screenshots from 2008: > Project and Developer News Feeds - Keep tabs on your favorite projects and the people that work on them. https://web.archive.org/web/20081113115832/http://github.com... > Public Developer Profiles - See what other developers are working on and how…
Sure, the one sentence you picked, taken out of context, makes it look like I'm generally against feeds. When you put it in the broad context of my comment though, you can easily see that it's the AI bit that's the problem.
I'm happy seeing random/algorithmically picked stuff shown on the homepage RHS ("Explore repositories") - it doesn't hurt me, and I might find something useful there. I don't want algorithmic stuff on the _main_ part of the page, which instead contains repositories and people I follow. I'd draw the line at this.
> as users worried the recommendations were turning GitHub into something distressingly like a social media platform. Really users? This is news? I'll echo what I've said in another comment ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30769570 ) regarding GitHub being a social platform: > GitHub has always branded itself as a "social collaboration platform" rather than anything else (well, first "git hosting" but secondly…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on what you're doing. If you're just browsing a repo, it's fine. If you're debugging something and need a timestamp for when a change went in, it's abysmal.
Just a note for the audience in general: In github, if you hover your mouse over a time like "2 days ago", the tooltip will give you the exact timestamp. However, I can't find any way to easily copy this into your clipboard (for that I guess you have to go to your old friend "git show" or "git log")
> as users worried the recommendations were turning GitHub into something distressingly like a social media platform. Really users? This is news? I'll echo what I've said in another comment ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30769570 ) regarding GitHub being a social platform: > GitHub has always branded itself as a "social collaboration platform" rather than anything else (well, first "git hosting" but secondly…
"Social" is not a synonym for "facebook". Github is a collaborative social platform. This still seems pointless and offbrand. There is no contradiction here.
It shouldn't be. Social has its place, but I don't want to see memes and emojis and dramaposting with upvotes and downvotes and karma whoring on a project page. The purpose of Github should be to distribute and collaboratively develop software and nothing more. None of the social features make developing software easier, they distract from what should be the platform's purpose. Soon, you won't even need to deal with Git or push a repo at all, they'll just remove all of that "coding" shit and become another Twitter clone. That's the inevitable endstate of adding social features, they consume everything.
Feh. Feh, I say!
> as users worried the recommendations were turning GitHub into something distressingly like a social media platform. Really users? This is news? I'll echo what I've said in another comment ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30769570 ) regarding GitHub being a social platform: > GitHub has always branded itself as a "social collaboration platform" rather than anything else (well, first "git hosting" but secondly…
"Social" is not a synonym for "facebook". Github is a collaborative social platform. This still seems pointless and offbrand. There is no contradiction here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would MS want to kill github? It's huge, it serves a vital need, and if MS does manage to strangle it in some way, someone else will fork a similar service and everyone will flock to that, similarly to how everyone left Sourceforge for Github, as I understand it.
that kind of features turn off many developers, including me reason why i abandoned MSN messenger back in the days was because they started to mimic facebook features, same thing as skype, as people pointed in the github discussion