141–150 of 416 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it depends on how big your teams are. There are some perf issues on the on premise solution, but when you're dealing with dozens of teams, each about 5-6 engineers all following scrum or kanban, you really need something like Atlassian.
I'm on a team of ~40. Doing fine with Slack, Github, and Trello (and no Atlassian products).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
gitlab and bitbucket aren't as good, I've tried them and more. GitHub isn't a commodity that excels only because of it happening to be popular. People choose GitHub because it's both popular and good. It has competition, some of which are better for specific circumstances, but as a whole they don't execute as well. Let me contrast with Facebook – it was only good, in my opinion, for a brief period starting in 2005 wh…
Bitbucket is not as good? Feature-wise they're almost identical.... I use github for my FOSS projects and bitbucket for stuff that shouldn't be public, like for-profit soft and side-projects. If you don't see added value in free unlimited private repos that's not the case for many of us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing that GitHub has right now is the userbase - the network effect keeps people interested in their service. The technical value they provide is pretty trivially replicable (see: GitLab, BitBucket), but you can't code up a (real) community. It's worth noting that 10 years ago, this same statement was true of Sourceforge.
GitHub's enterprise grade services and their integration with 3rd party and on-site solutions is currently above what anyone else provides. It's way above being a simple repository storage which isn't a trivial think to setup to begin with just watch the various talks from BitBucket's core team. As long as everyone else has to play catch up they will be fine. And i don't see sourceforge as being comparable unless you…
Sourceforge offered shell access for SVN; Google drive and dropbox wouldn't support branching, merging etc. To say sourceforge is in a category closer to them than to github is ridiculous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you explicitly state what it is you are referring to? I'm not familiar with github's content restrictions.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118 tl;dr: Observed fact, GitHub disappeared a repo (this I personally know for a fact) and all its forks, the only reason we can surmise is that it described itself as "X for retards". I believe it's this one https://github.com/WebMBro/WebMConverter now described as "WebM for bakas." (Japanglish for idiots or fools). Per this https://imgur.com/QC51FZz it was indeed for the us…
I'm sure it's justified I just don't understand why.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not aware of Microsoft Word or any editor I've ever used or heard of forbidding me from using the word "retards" or any other. Heck, Gnu Emacs allows me to write proprietary software, a user freedom RMS is no doubt not entirely happy with. I require that general freedom of expression in my tools and do no tolerate vendors who engage in these sorts of damaging stunts. I suspect I'm not alone, and I note GitHub has…
Also not the first time Github has deleted a repo for ideological reasons. See: C+=
Both this piece, and most commenters, seem to miss the point about where Github's value comes from. It's not for being a social identity for programmers, or hosting open-source libraries. Those are worthy pursuits, but from a business perspective mostly serve as marketing. Github is basically Microsoft Word for programmers, and is an essential part of their workflow. Companies that need enterprise functionality aroun…
Microsoft Word became a valuable monopoly because it was a proprietary standard. But git hosting is a commodity service. There are already a number of players doing exactly what GitHub does, for less money, and it's trivially easy to migrate a repository away from GitHub to those other providers. Something tells me that the "facebook for programmers" angle is essential to selling the dream here. The so-called "networ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry to say, but any time I need a private repo I just head to BitBucket. GitHub provides tremendous value, I hope they find a good way to capture some of it.
I get that when it's just a personal project, but the Github workflow is also very nice to have. When I want a buddy to access my private repo, I just add his/her GitHub user name, I don't need to have them create a BitBucket account. I don't need to figure out how issues and PRs work with BitBucket, etc. It's the network effects and UI that I'm paying for - one UI private or public. Plus, it supports a service I val…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you explicitly state what it is you are referring to? I'm not familiar with github's content restrictions.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118 tl;dr: Observed fact, GitHub disappeared a repo (this I personally know for a fact) and all its forks, the only reason we can surmise is that it described itself as "X for retards". I believe it's this one https://github.com/WebMBro/WebMConverter now described as "WebM for bakas." (Japanglish for idiots or fools). Per this https://imgur.com/QC51FZz it was indeed for the us…
I think it's pretty much inevitable once the money rolls in that companies like Github and others will start censoring content and generally doing things that upset the community to appease their investors. I can't think of a single company that doesn't do this, and in many cases it has led to a downturn of the company if not outright demise.