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

Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 205 posts

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#171

Post by cvalka »

kgeist wrote: post #22
jaylittle wrote: post #2

One day the pendulum will swing back in the other direction. Until then, those of us who disagree with putting absolutely everything into the cloud will just have to sit back and bide our time.

Russia is probably an outlier here, but the pendulum here is swinging back to on-prem, especially if the cloud provider is located in a different country. (Example: former McDonalds recently bought an on-prem solution from our company, although we have a cloud version, too). Today you're on good terms with a cloud provider, tomorrow the politics go 360° and all your data is lost. Probably not not as urgent in the fir…

ELMA :-)

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#172

Post by TheNewsIsHere »

kosikond wrote: post #138
gwright wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone identified an easy/feasible way to add SSO authentication to github pages?

OTOH couldn't it be done with Cloudflare Zero Trust ? Have the GH Pages (sub)domain proxied with CF, protect the URL with Zero Trust, for SSO itself there are several IdP available [0]. First 50 users are not billed. [0] https://developers.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-one/identity/id...

I haven’t tried doing this, although I’ve thought of it to solve a similar problem, which I ultimately solved by not bothering and just letting GitHub render the docs. (Purely internal technical use cases, so not an issue.)

I haven’t experimented, but my first attack would be to query the GH Pages service directly and specify the host header. Bypass Cloudflare entirely.

GitHub Pages supports SSO with the enterprise cloud plan, of course.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#173

Post by WorldMaker »

hnarn wrote: post #141

This is kind of hilarious since a lot of places where I've used Atlassian products seem to have more or less hated them but still put up with them for the sole reason that they are on-prem, and the competition available for the entire "suite" or whatever is pretty sparse. I'd be curious to see what kind of market share is estimated to be "on-prem, won't switch" because it sure isn't zero.

I also appreciate the irony layers of the companies that chose Atlassian's cloud products because "worst case we can install on-prem" but also picked the cloud products because they tried to install on-prem at least once and it was horrifying and they didn't want the stress of maintaining it.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#174

Post by TheNewsIsHere »

WorldMaker wrote: post #170
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite the "Azure" name, Azure DevOps Server (formerly Team Foundation Server), is still a rock-solid on-prem system for git repo hosting, issues/stories/projects, build automation, and the rest - though I feel it has stagnated somewhat, and git integration still feels half-baked compared to TFS's previous SVN-clone, but is still my first-choice for on-prem installs (granted, I'm still wedded to the MSFT stack).

If you have access to Azure DevOps Server your company likely also has access in its existing plans to GitHub Enterprise (on-prem) as well. GitHub Enterprise is usually about 6 to 9 months behind GitHub "Regular", but that's quite a bit better than Azure DevOps "Regular" which now seems destined to be 2-3 years behind GitHub and however far Azure DevOps Server trails behind that. Microsoft is still playing "will they…

I keep hearing rumors that I can’t corroborate that the decision has already been made to kill Azure DevOps but that there won’t be an announcement until there’s a timeline. I’ve never seen it in black and white. I’ve seen that comment several times on HN, but it’s always so couched that it’s sort of useless.

It seems like one of those rumors that doesn’t die, and then just becomes self-fulfilling if they ever do announce it.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#175

Post by TheNewsIsHere »

weinzierl wrote: post #164
firesteelrain wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is pricey - I will not disagree with you. It is 1-500 is the license tier and that costs $42,000 per year for the Jira data center subscription, $27,000 for Confluence, BitBucket is $2,300 for 1-25, Crowd is $5800 for 1-500, and Bamboo is $11k for up to 25 users. I would not connect any of these services directly to the Internet.

Do you know how this compares with the Atlassian Server (on-prem) option, let's say in the best case of 500 users?

They no longer sell Atlassian “Server edition” licenses. Just Data Center and Cloud now.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#176

Post by WorldMaker »

TheNewsIsHere wrote: post #174
WorldMaker wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have access to Azure DevOps Server your company likely also has access in its existing plans to GitHub Enterprise (on-prem) as well. GitHub Enterprise is usually about 6 to 9 months behind GitHub "Regular", but that's quite a bit better than Azure DevOps "Regular" which now seems destined to be 2-3 years behind GitHub and however far Azure DevOps Server trails behind that. Microsoft is still playing "will they…

I keep hearing rumors that I can’t corroborate that the decision has already been made to kill Azure DevOps but that there won’t be an announcement until there’s a timeline. I’ve never seen it in black and white. I’ve seen that comment several times on HN, but it’s always so couched that it’s sort of useless. It seems like one of those rumors that doesn’t die, and then just becomes self-fulfilling if they ever do ann…

Microsoft's "on the record" voice is always "Azure DevOps is alive and has an active roadmap".

You can read that roadmap for yourself. It is kept in a GitHub repository. Last time I checked this year the last commit was sometime in 2020. The last group of features that loudly launched for Azure DevOps were branded "GitHub Advanced Security for Azure DevOps". (This is where I get the 2-3 years behind GitHub metric.) Microsoft's actions seem to be speaking a lot louder than their "on the record" words.

I've heard from multiple "off the record" sources who are entirely hearsay and I cannot name names that "Yes, of course Azure DevOps is dead."

The best, I can say, as mostly an outsider is that Azure DevOps is at least "undead" and definitely in some sort of zombie state. I've got an unsubstantiated feeling, again as mostly an outsider, that Microsoft is somehow superstitious about Azure DevOps' home office (Microsoft office in North Carolina was founded out of Microsoft's source control dreams) and is afraid to kill it.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#177

Post by TheNewsIsHere »

botulidze wrote: post #82
tallanvor wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the enterprise level, I suppose you could be looking at IBM Rational or Microsoft Dynamics. I'm surprised ServiceNow isn't trying to break into this space. But with the amount of customization that ends up being demanded, I'm not surprised the big companies start rolling their own. For smaller companies, there's so many choices out there, I can understand why it's hard to decide on one.

> IBM Rational or Microsoft Dynamics Thanks, haven't checked those two. > I'm surprised ServiceNow isn't trying to break into this space. Last time I ran SNOW a few years ago, it was slowly but steadily heading into the SAP trajectory - highly-customazible per customer needs, expensive to pay and even more expensive to migrate onto. And it doesn't seem to prioritize any developer-oriented features to appeal to that c…

ServiceNow’s current CEO is one of SAPs former CEOs. It’s become very heavy on sales culture. On the other hand, they’ve been trying to get customers to stop customizing core functionalities and adopt the platform’s processes. That’s probably not a bad thing overall.

Specific to this thread, though, they have much broader Github integrations available as well, including using git to manage apps authored in Studio, although there are some pain points.

More broadly, I wonder if anyone _really_ wants to be in this space if they’re not developing products specifically for developers as a core line of business. Dynamics and ServiceNow and other platforms and ERPs are great for reporting and tracking, but they often work in completely different ways than developer tooling does because they’re developed for fundamentally different roles.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#178

Post by jschumacher »

atribecalledqst wrote: post #24

JIRA has been annoying the shit out of me with their recent UI updates -- 1. Changing default sorting order to 'most recent first'; I thought I was going insane at first when it happened 2. Making the comment box a floating page element so it always takes up about 25% screen real estate I've been able to script these back to their old behavior but wouldn't it be nice if they added settings to toggle the behavior... M…

It’s a tricky balance. It would be easy for Atlassian to add settings. But every setting adds complexity. And I think we can all agree that we don’t want Jira to be more complex.

It takes a short time to adjust to UI changes, but settings live on forever.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#179

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

WorldMaker wrote: post #176
TheNewsIsHere wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing rumors that I can’t corroborate that the decision has already been made to kill Azure DevOps but that there won’t be an announcement until there’s a timeline. I’ve never seen it in black and white. I’ve seen that comment several times on HN, but it’s always so couched that it’s sort of useless. It seems like one of those rumors that doesn’t die, and then just becomes self-fulfilling if they ever do ann…

Microsoft's "on the record" voice is always "Azure DevOps is alive and has an active roadmap". You can read that roadmap for yourself. It is kept in a GitHub repository . Last time I checked this year the last commit was sometime in 2020. The last group of features that loudly launched for Azure DevOps were branded "GitHub Advanced Security for Azure DevOps". (This is where I get the 2-3 years behind GitHub metric.)…

I used to work at Microsoft, though I left a few years before MS purchased GitHub. Post-2010s, Microsoft was still migrating many products away from Perforce/SourceDepot and into TFS, and then TFS+git around ~2015. Microsoft hacked TFS to be a git server so they could continue to use TFS for work-item/project-tracking (and no-one wanted to go back to Product Studio). That’s TFS’ strength, as far as Microsoft is concerned, because git hosting is a trivially fungible feature here - whereas GitHub’s Issues only works well for small teams and really doesn’t scale to projects on the scale of Windows or Office.

…but I’ve noticed that GitHub’s recently (since 2020?) has really being fleshing-out their Projects/Issues - it’s not quite as flexible as TFS/AzDO’s Work-Items but on-track to reach parity in a few more years, I reckon.

So that’s my pet-theory: eventually GitHub (and GitHub Enterprise) will reach “good-enough” parity with AzDO for Issues/Work-Items/Project management - and as soon as that happens I fully expect AzDO to die an unceremonious death (because MS doesn’t want to spook the many Enterprise(TM) customers who still bankroll it). We may-or-may-not see some improvement in AzDO-to-GitHub migration tooling, as that that comes down to what side of the bed the Director of the ALM team woke up on that morning.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#180

Post by kgeist »

cvalka wrote: post #171
kgeist wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia is probably an outlier here, but the pendulum here is swinging back to on-prem, especially if the cloud provider is located in a different country. (Example: former McDonalds recently bought an on-prem solution from our company, although we have a cloud version, too). Today you're on good terms with a cloud provider, tomorrow the politics go 360° and all your data is lost. Probably not not as urgent in the fir…

ELMA :-)

If you mean Elma CRM, then no, we have a different product.
Post reply on HN