Live data from Hacker News

Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

venturebeat.com

51–60 of 164 posts

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#51
post #37
post #18

My team has just started looking for a github replacement because the code review workflow is just not working for us, we need something with more structure. I think there's plenty of space for feature and price competition, especially for private repos where github's social network effects don't matter as much.

We use gerrit hosted on EC2 mirroring commits to github for backup.

I am an unabashed fan of Gerrit - the fine-grained ACLs can be annoying to wrap your head around, but the code review interface is quite nice.

the only thing I've found missing is the ability to render images inline. If someone submits a documentation update with SVG and PNG updates, you have to download the changeset to see the files. It would be nice if an option for "view this attachment inline" were available without installing extensions.

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#52
post #43

So they killed Google code to... launch another code hosting thing? Does Google have too many siloed product managers? Maybe you can only advance up the corporate ladder by releasing new products, and fuck all if they get killed later, because you got your promotion? No clue what the cause. Just seems weird looking on from the sidelines.

A while ago I remember hearing in some podcast from googler that they internally have separate source code management system (not related to Google Code). I wouldn't be surprised it he was talking about this one and they finally decided to make it public. Killing Google Code was probably just because not many people used it (externally or internally).

It's far more likely the Googler was referring to Google's variant of Perforce, which is what is used for most internal projects.

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#54
post #44
post #27

Calling a source code repo service a competitor to GitHub is like calling a online book store a competitor to Amazon. Hint: source code is not GitHub's value, just like books where not Amazon's. GitHubs true value is something Google is profoundly bad at.

What is gtihub's true value?

Social.

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#55
post #25
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Google now try to take it all like the old Microsoft. No wonder they get bad response for each new product like that people simply don't trust them anymore.

I pretty much trust Google, Apple, Amazon etc. to safeguard my data better than others. What do you mean? Don't you use gmail, publish to the app store, and host with AWS? Do you use Stripe for payments? Google Maps? Facebook login? You are trusting these companies with a great deal.

>Don't you use gmail, publish to the app store, and host with AWS? Do you use Stripe for payments? Google Maps? Facebook login?

Dear god no, no, no, no, no, no.

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#56
post #18

My team has just started looking for a github replacement because the code review workflow is just not working for us, we need something with more structure. I think there's plenty of space for feature and price competition, especially for private repos where github's social network effects don't matter as much.

check out stash by atlassian https://www.atlassian.com/software/stash

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#57
post #18

My team has just started looking for a github replacement because the code review workflow is just not working for us, we need something with more structure. I think there's plenty of space for feature and price competition, especially for private repos where github's social network effects don't matter as much.

Maybe you should look at RhodeCode, it has several different workflows for code-review. From very simple like just voting on each individual commit, to a fully blown server side mergable workflow that includes, voting, checks by CI, and integration to external services. We did a blog about it recently on how we use it internally: https://rhodecode.com/blog/increased-automation-at-rhodecode...

Displaimer: i'm the CTO of RhodeCode

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#58
post #16
post #6

This article is just click bait. Pretty sure this product is just so you can store your code/repo for your project using Google's cloud services. It's part of a whole for their cloud offering.

Yep, more of a competitor to Microsoft's Visual Studio Online than any of the social coding platforms: https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/products/what-is-visual-s...

Well, one part of VSO, since that includes Bugs/Build/Test. I don't really know many private source-only hosting providers though.

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#59
post #18

My team has just started looking for a github replacement because the code review workflow is just not working for us, we need something with more structure. I think there's plenty of space for feature and price competition, especially for private repos where github's social network effects don't matter as much.

Take a look at Phabricator:

http://phabricator.org/

It has it's own code review workflow which is, in my opinion, superior to Github's.

A nice summary:

http://cramer.io/2014/05/03/on-pull-requests/

Re: Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

#60
post #26

The reason people use GitHub is everything around the git hosting: the web interface, the account system, pull requests and issues, forking, comments, wikis, Pages, even the desktop and mobile apps. Hosting git repositories is straightforward, by design. This article is only slightly more sensible than claiming that S3 is a GitHub competitor because you can git clone over HTTP.

Lately, the Web UI has been sucky, I relied on my username button quite a bit, now I have to perform two steps to go to my user page

To be honest, I think it has always been sucky in many ways. They change it quite frequently, but it doesn't actually seem to be changes that improve the UI. It only makes it frustratingly different than before.

I often wonder if the projects my team works on ends up that way. We A/B test a lot of changes and often find that it makes absolutely no difference in conversion. In the end we often don't change things that seem to be "obvious" improvements for fear that we'll just frustrate our customers by changing things in ways they don't care about.

UI design is hard :-)

Post reply on HN