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

391–400 of 585 posts

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#391

Post by pluc »

rglullis wrote: post #214
seadan83 wrote: post #176

As a leader of a FOSS project that is on github, and migrated off of sourceforge because SVN and email patches were not scaling - I'm a bit confused by this article. Co-pilot has issues, ergo github is going the way of sourceforge, and so now we must abandon github? Do I have that reasoning correct? We need to: - migrate the bug queue - have all links in commit history break - application integration with githib for…

Forget Copilot for a second. Do you think it is healthy for the industry to be so dependent on one single service provider, and a closed one on top of that?

There's no getting away from it. Unless you're RMS, you're dependent on Microsoft or Apple. Just like your phones are dependent on Google or Apple. Is it a good thing? Nope, but it's real convenient and so most people will compromise.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#392

Post by gerdesj »

naikrovek wrote: post #320
josephcsible wrote: post #122

> If it is, as you claim, permissible to train the model (and allow users to generate code based on that model) on any code whatsoever and not be bound by any licensing terms, why did you choose to only train Copilot's model on FOSS? For example, why are your Microsoft Windows and Office codebases not in your training set? This is my favorite question about Copilot ever.

I want to know what stuff you guys are putting in public GitHub FOSS repos that you don't want replicated in any way... I also want to know why people think their code is so special that no one else could have ever come up with it independently. Each and every opponent of Copilot is the best developer ever, I guess? That said, I don't understand the choice to use GPL for any reason, so maybe I'm not equipped to under…

"I also want to know why people think their code is so special that no one else could have ever come up with it independently. "

Really? What exactly does this CoPilot thing actually spit out? I can't help but think that it spits out near verbatim, which in the UK is probably dodgy on Copywrite.

You then go on to decide that the GPL isn't for you. That's fine. You even explain that you are ill-equipped for something. That too is fine.

You are not a fan of free or "libre" stuff. That comes across loud and clear. Thank you.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#393

Post by blooalien »

bayindirh wrote: post #300
seadan83 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is gitlab, a decent alternative. Bitbucket is a (poor) option too. I think I would quibble with that dependency statement. Github is providing a lot of services, high availability, project tracking, a web api, etc... The money model, as is for many free to FOSS tools is that by getting devs tooo use those tools, they'll carry forward to their professional lives and recommend the adoption by their companies. Tha…

GitLab, with its runners is a more than a decent alternative, which you can also host yourself, with really minimal effort.

Gitea is really nice, too. That's what I personally prefer to use.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#394

Post by redeeman »

UncleEntity wrote: post #374
naikrovek wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Forcing your code to be open forever is guaranteeing freedom of all users of [your] code No, that’s forcing restriction on all users of your code. Usage restriction is the opposite of freedom… Forcing all of your code to be GPL is like saying “I am on a diet, so now I will force everyone else be on the same diet. Freedom!”

> Forcing all of your code to be GPL is like saying “I am on a diet, so now I will force everyone else be on the same diet. Freedom!” Nobody is forcing anyone to use the code. If they chose to use it they have to abide by the licensing terms because that’s how it works. If the people laboring for free to produce this code don’t want it to be used in a proprietary application then tough luck, write the code yourself.…

> Nobody is forcing anyone to use the code.

until the time comes when a tax department gets the funny idea to use it, and forced you to use it, or people with guns come to your door and haul you away in the morning.

(edit: formatting)

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#395

Post by blibble »

sreevisakh wrote: post #288
gnufied wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given Git is distributed (or most source control as a matter of fact today is) - even if you stopped pushing your code to Github, does it stop Copilot from pulling code from sources like gitlab.gnome.org, kernel.org, gitlab.kde.org etc? I think underlying discussion should be about licensing, not about website to which you are pushing open source code to. Because that can be easily worked around.

There is a hidden problem with licensing here. Developers are giving Github the permission to use the code with a different license [1]. The clause sounds broad enough for them to justify training copilot with it. This allows them to disregard the license with which the project is published. The developers don't have the protection of a FOSS license anymore when you host there. [1] https://docs.github.com/en/site-pol…

I don't see anything in that licence that would allow it to be used as a corpus for machine learning

most likely they're relying on fair use, which would apply regardless of where it's hosted

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#396

Post by doodles33 »

joshstrange wrote: post #381
doodles33 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remix provides something close to what you are thinking, the application works perfectly without JavaScript but gets enhanced if it's enabled which is pretty nice. edit: Without code duplication of course

Remix, along with the other frameworks/libraries you've mentioned, are very interesting. I've considered trying out SSR with Quasar (the Vue framework I work most in), though selling it to "business" is hard and I understand why, I can't bring myself to eat the cost (both time and real dollar cost) on my own projects. I do hope SSR continues to advance, though I have some trouble imagining a "free"/"seamless" fallbac…

Yeah as of now I think the SSR capabilities of NextJS and NuxtJS will serve mostly for the first paint, it will also allow a user to navigate between pages without running JavaScript (which a SPA wouldn't). I do have to agree though that at a certain point thinking further than this about non-js users becomes too cumbersome and not really worth it if your application is truly a web _app_ meaning very interactive and to the point it could be bundled as a desktop application.

I'd like to note that Remix does handle everything being tied to a single logic as far as my testing went, I love it. The idea is that basically all interaction is done with html forms (like in the old days) and Remix loads a React bundle that makes that run client side after the page has loaded. It's a very simple model that should work for most use cases, although I don't think it's suitable if you're truly developing a web _app_.

As with everything, balance is key. JavaScript is useful and more appropriate is some situations, and it's not in others. I do hope to see more progress with seamless SSR for SPAs though, I think it would make the internet a much better place.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#397

Post by UncleEntity »

evouga wrote: post #246
longrod wrote: post #212

I find it very strange that the same HN crowd that loves open source and wouldn't touch anything proprietary with a 10 foot pole has so many reservations against moving off of GitHub. I am not generalizing here, just surprised. According to what I have seen in my short experience, HN should have ditched GitHub long since. Anyway... I have always been curious as to why the largest hosting for OSS isn't open source its…

> But I suppose convenience always trumps openness and freedom. It's especially sad because the whole point behind FOSS was this. Is the whole FOSS idea getting old? It seems so---I read the post above saying essentially "I don't care about any of this criticism, I'm going to keep using GitHub because switching would cause too much churn" and did a double-take.

I get the impression that people no longer understand what it is to boycott something.

The whole point is to punish the boycottee which may cause inconvenience. Much easier to dogpile on twitter I suppose.

I can’t really think of a universally sustained boycott since South African apartheid to be honest. Even the current Russian stuff is too inconvenient for the majority of the world so they keep buying their oil and gas.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#398

Post by rglullis »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #369
rglullis wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to. You can just pay gitlab, codeberg, sourcehut...

github...

As an alternative to github... one of these is not like the others.

In any case... why github? What is so unique about it that you can't even consider other possibilities? I guess soon people will be non-ironically saying "no one ever got fired for hosting their code at Github" and turn a blind eye to perfectly usable, open alternatives who does not lock us in.

For what? Fear of taking responsibility for maintaining the basic tools for their job? If that is the case, you can always pay for other smaller, independent companies who can host at competitive rates.

Anyway, you do you. I'm tired of playing Cassandra, and I'm tired of seeing people giving in to convenience and general conformity.

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#399

Post by AndyKelley »

Dear SFConservancy,

You need to pay more attention to GitHub Sponsors. Not sure how you could write this article and then not even mention it. You're asking people to walk away from a giant pile of money without even addressing it?

Re: Give up GitHub: The time has come

#400

Post by rglullis »

pluc wrote: post #391
rglullis wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget Copilot for a second. Do you think it is healthy for the industry to be so dependent on one single service provider, and a closed one on top of that?

There's no getting away from it. Unless you're RMS, you're dependent on Microsoft or Apple. Just like your phones are dependent on Google or Apple. Is it a good thing? Nope, but it's real convenient and so most people will compromise.

> Unless you're RMS, you're dependent on Microsoft or Apple

No. Stopping believing this shit. It has never been easier to not depend on any of them.

There are good, perfectly usable phones with de-googled Android. You can buy laptops and desktops that run Linux without issues out of the box for years. You can even game on Linux today better than you can on an Apple box. You have legions of people working on different open source projects that make hosting your own server a matter of point-and-clicking.

It's not an Sisyphean job to keep yourself away from bad tech products. It takes some discipline, but so does anything worth doing.

And if you really just want to pay to get rid of any "headache", why not then pay for an open source alternative so you can be safe knowing you won't get locked in?

Post reply on HN