Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Give up GitHub: The time has come

sfconservancy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 585 posts

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#61

Post by skeeter2020 »

NoGravitas wrote: post #47

I publish my public FOSS work on a self-hosted Gitea. I don't allow account creation, and people can send me pull requests by email. That said, I think one thing (other than interface and brand loyalty) that keeps FOSS projects on GitHub is network effects. You can reasonably expect to search it and find the projects you're looking for, and your account lets you use the issue tracker and pull requests on other projec…

I love email & personally prefer it for communication, but there is an entire cohort of developers headed your way who rarely us it outside of "job-realated requirements".

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#62

Post by briffle »

travisgriggs wrote: post #5

> For its part, Git was designed specifically to make software development distributed without a centralized site. Just yesterday I had to explain the basic premise/history of Git to a young intern. I had asked him if he was using Git to manage his little pet project the company gave him to play with. “No”, he replied, he didn’t know what the company’s policy was to posting code in public on GitHub. As I explained to…

I have had to have the same conversation with co-workers who have been developing for many years, but using tools like SVN, or similar Microsoft code repos that require a centralized repo.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#63

Post by NoGravitas »

cybrox wrote: post #52
NoGravitas wrote: post #47

I publish my public FOSS work on a self-hosted Gitea. I don't allow account creation, and people can send me pull requests by email. That said, I think one thing (other than interface and brand loyalty) that keeps FOSS projects on GitHub is network effects. You can reasonably expect to search it and find the projects you're looking for, and your account lets you use the issue tracker and pull requests on other projec…

> people can send me pull requests by email. Great, you already lost half of them.

Generally the ones I don't mind losing. If anyone can't figure out how to send a git pull request or patchset by email, I'm happy for them to email me with questions on how to, which I will answer as best I can.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#64

Post by swader999 »

prepend wrote: post #56
BeetleB wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2 years ago, while interviewing internally, I asked the team what VC they use. It was Team Foundation's proprietary VC (and not a DVCS). I mentioned to them that even MS recommends Git for Team Foundation's usage. "Well of course, MS invented Git!" Wrong on so many levels: 1. Conflating Github with Git. 2. They bought it, not invented/founded it. 3. Most importantly, MS's recommendation to use Git for TF existed long…

> refusal to use Git[1] due to its complexity I kind of like this friction. If a software developer finds git too complex, that’s an important signal that I should minimize my exposure to them. I’d never work in a team that dumb, and I wouldn’t want any dependencies on their code. Of course there are other reasons not to use git, but complexity is not one.

Does a typical enterprise need a distributed source control system? It makes a lot of sense for open source.

Doesn't the uptake in Github which centralizes this distributed system kind of invalidate its main tenant?

I haven't been a hundred percent sure the overhead was ever worth it at most other types of paid gigs over the years. Adding complexity without value is a mistake imo. Maybe it's my own fault I haven't seen the value...

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#65

Post by 10x-dev »

parentheses wrote: post #43

GitHub is a business and currently provides free storage and a pretty nice interface to it. It’s easy to say “our rights are being stripped away” but the view that businesses should operate like non profits or government services with the common good in mind is ludicrous!

It is objectively not ludicrous. It might go against the commonly taught idea that businesses should focus solely on generating profits, but it is not unreasonable to create a system where businesses have to keep the common good in mind.

There is a difference between 'how things are now' and 'how things could be'. Imagining and wanting a different status quo is not by itself ludicrous (especially since we all stand to benefit from such businesses), it's a first step towards change.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#66

Post by itslennysfault »

travisgriggs wrote: post #5

> For its part, Git was designed specifically to make software development distributed without a centralized site. Just yesterday I had to explain the basic premise/history of Git to a young intern. I had asked him if he was using Git to manage his little pet project the company gave him to play with. “No”, he replied, he didn’t know what the company’s policy was to posting code in public on GitHub. As I explained to…

I used to teach a coding bootcamp. I had over 100 students over about 2 years, and ran into this constantly despite my best effort to explain that git != github from day one. We even did an exercise where we just used git locally first and then later (on a different day) showed how you can push to github. It didn't seem to matter. People just decided that git = github and couldn't let go of that.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#67

Post by leethargo »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #28
dreamcompiler wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the parent's point was that the intern knew about github and assumed git was github.

I used to be confused by this. It's because "git" is in the name and GitHub is the first thing you encounter, so I was like, "oh, is git some command line extension of GitHub?" rather than the reverse. :D

Similarly, as a youngling, I often confused GNU and Gnome, in particular because several popular (often GTK-based) applications from either started with `g`, eg GIMP, gedit, gparted.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#69

Post by spencerchubb »

itslennysfault wrote: post #66
travisgriggs wrote: post #5

> For its part, Git was designed specifically to make software development distributed without a centralized site. Just yesterday I had to explain the basic premise/history of Git to a young intern. I had asked him if he was using Git to manage his little pet project the company gave him to play with. “No”, he replied, he didn’t know what the company’s policy was to posting code in public on GitHub. As I explained to…

I used to teach a coding bootcamp. I had over 100 students over about 2 years, and ran into this constantly despite my best effort to explain that git != github from day one. We even did an exercise where we just used git locally first and then later (on a different day) showed how you can push to github. It didn't seem to matter. People just decided that git = github and couldn't let go of that.

git --> github

porn --> pornhub

best explanation of github for noobs

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#70

Post by brundolf »

travisgriggs wrote: post #5

> For its part, Git was designed specifically to make software development distributed without a centralized site. Just yesterday I had to explain the basic premise/history of Git to a young intern. I had asked him if he was using Git to manage his little pet project the company gave him to play with. “No”, he replied, he didn’t know what the company’s policy was to posting code in public on GitHub. As I explained to…

I don't think it's fair to frame this as specific to GitHub, or even as a thing to wring hands over.

New devs - especially those coming from bootcamps (I say this without judgement) - mostly start with practical skills. Industry-standard ways to just get things done. That's how you get a job, that's how you get off the ground. This goes beyond source-control; languages/frameworks, tooling, etc. You enter the territory - with your finite bandwidth for learning - where it's most immediately useful. And then over the years you move out from there, incorporating more and more nuance and detail and auxiliary knowledge.

There's no need for moral panic. "Where it's most useful to start" has shifted, sure. But that's natural; I don't think it's a new phenomenon or in a fundamentally worse place than before. GitHub is a higher-level tool that makes you dramatically more productive than raw git on its own. The details will be filled in as they work their first job.

Post reply on HN