Live data from Hacker News

Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

cursor.com

271–280 of 519 posts

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#271
post #114

GitHub is a mess so lets throw our code into a Musk owned enterprise, famously a different shade of mess? How about neither? Man I wish we stuck with Subversion at this point.

I feel like the "GitHub is a mess" conversation is a little forced at times - I spend a significant portion of my work day in GitHub and while there have been an uptick in outages lately, it still feels like a very solid platform. I guess I personally wouldn't categorize it as a "mess" and the conversations I read about it here make me think I'm using an entirely different product than everyone else.

github for hobbyists and small orgs and simple open source projects is wonderful.

github for large project that rely on CI tool is a nightmare (cost, downtime, etc.)

I'm guessing you dont know about the github actions bug that was running and endless loop consuming 100% cpu costing orgs insane amounts of money that they didn't fix for 3 years.

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#272
post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actions should be decoupled from the version control system.

In theory, sure, but the reality is that "development activity" revolves around "codebase". Plenty of projects have separate bug tracker, source code control and CI system. Most people likely prefer GitHub's all-in-one solution, especially for small-medium open source projects.

And do we not see how terrible this is as a result? Hitching your tent to corporations, especially American corporations, is always an exercise in misery.

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference with GitHub is you can also use it if the main instance is down if you self host. (And again self hosting still gets you the interconnection benefits just like if everyone was on tangled.org)

you can also buy GitHub Enterprise onprem and get a managed, self-hosted experience, thereby avoiding the public GitHub downtime downtime and self-hosting is not a reason most people are convinced to move forges, it takes a lot to get someone there

I don't think you understood. You can still get a feature complete social experience that is NOT ISOLATED from anyone.

Your GitHub Enterprise comparison is wrong, because with an onprem github entreprise you don't have the social github features (and that's the whole point of tangled, use something else if you want a private forge for your company, it's not for this purpose)

My point is, Tangled being on ATProto, you can still access all of the repos, PRs and issues of other people by looking through your self-hosted appview even if the official appview is down, because an appview, is just that, an "app *view*" It's the view layer in your traditional app, and ATProto is the database.

It's a view of the data on the ATProto network, it is not the data holder, everyone can be their own data holder that is visible through any appview.

> downtime and self-hosting is not a reason most people are convinced to move forges, it takes a lot to get someone there

Yes, I agree, but I personally think tangled is great because of the interoperability

People on codeberg, on gitlab, on github, on self-hosted gitea instances, on self hosted gitlab instances, and so on, all control their issues, PRs, and git repos (they run on their own infra) but they are also more independent, are not subject to a central platform's policies (or are subject to the one they prefer) and so on, and they also introduce contributor friction, you need separate accounts, it can be difficult to cross reference issues and PRs accross projects on different forges, users can't easily have a central feed of project they starred.

On tangled you get to have the first part (freedom) while not having the second downside (unique account, cross-references work seamlessly, etc...)

Give me reasons open source projects moved forges away from github, and I am pretty sure if tangled did exist when they did so it would fit more boxes of "why they left" than their target forge.

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#275
post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been 5 hours and instead of "any" questions, you have only been happy to answer the 1 question that hasn't put you in a tight spot. Honestly, that does not look too good for you or the offering - and this is coming from someone that just chose Cursor over Claude Code a week ago.

He’s trying to do his job and the angry mob predictably came in to bully an easy target about unrelated things. Just take a look at some of the (thankfully flagged, mostly) responses.

I'm going through and flagging the guideline-breaking comments (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49348639) - I'd encourage you to do that, too, to help preserve the quality of HN.

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#276
post #114

GitHub is a mess so lets throw our code into a Musk owned enterprise, famously a different shade of mess? How about neither? Man I wish we stuck with Subversion at this point.

This is the correct answer, but let me add a corolarium, both github, whatever cursor launches and any other bigco does obeys to the same friking iron law: *MAKE MONEY/POWER AT ANY COST, MONEY/POWER IS THE OBJECTIVE*, so you will get EXACTLY the same result from each one of them given enough time has passed.

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#277
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You need centralization (or at the very least, a standard) for that. We have a standard! It’s this great decentralized VCS called git. For most of the stuff integrations do, they’re just showing code or commits — both of which are readily available in a copy of the repo. Probably the one thing that’s missing is a standardized webhook system so that your git repo storage could tell integrations when stuff changes. T…

Git is absolutely miserable without things that GitHub, GitLab, and others provide, and there's still a huge ceiling to grow into in terms of layering on UX on top of Git. In my opinion, Git is holding software development back. Git only cares about lines of text. This is not enough in today's world.

> Git only cares about lines of text. This is not enough in today's world.

I'm working on git-inspired VCS based on syntax tree nodes stored in prolly trees. Might that be enough? I've not 100% locked down the format yet, but tentatively it looks like this: https://gist.github.com/conartist6/7dd40697140965ee343de93b9...

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#279
post #114

GitHub is a mess so lets throw our code into a Musk owned enterprise, famously a different shade of mess? How about neither? Man I wish we stuck with Subversion at this point.

100% not a chance for me. I'd rather host it myself on a Pi on a 56k dialup connection with 12% uptime then ever let an Elon related company touch my code.

Re: Cursor launches Origin, GitHub alternative

#280
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You need centralization (or at the very least, a standard) for that. We have a standard! It’s this great decentralized VCS called git. For most of the stuff integrations do, they’re just showing code or commits — both of which are readily available in a copy of the repo. Probably the one thing that’s missing is a standardized webhook system so that your git repo storage could tell integrations when stuff changes. T…

Git is absolutely miserable without things that GitHub, GitLab, and others provide, and there's still a huge ceiling to grow into in terms of layering on UX on top of Git. In my opinion, Git is holding software development back. Git only cares about lines of text. This is not enough in today's world.

Why not? LLMs also only care about lines of text.
Post reply on HN