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

GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 416 posts

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#261

Post by [deleted] »

hga wrote: post #67
calcsam wrote: post #41

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…

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…

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#262

Post by girvo »

mpdehaan2 wrote: post #180
mszyndel wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet to meet a developer who's as excited about using Jira as about using Github issues...

Despite having a gazillion issue trackers, something halfway between the two would be welcome. GitHub issue tracking is not good enough to manage any kind of large project, JIRA is a bit of a beast. I'd prefer having an integrated JIRA any day, though I do still strongly DISLIKE JIRA. There's still opportunity for something better IMHO. (For very small teams, I find that's Trello, but Trello isn't really for large gr…

I really enjoy Breeze[0] at work. It's similar in concept to Trello, but aimed far more at project management and development. They just released a Gantt chart app that integrates with it, which is making some managers here really happy, heh.

[0] https://breeze.pm

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#263

Post by peteretep »

ghuntley wrote: post #243
calcsam wrote: post #41

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…

Yep, you are right on point. Developers use the commodity version at home and want to use the same (awesome) tools in the workplace. Enterprise companies who wish to differentiate their hiring/talent pipeline recognise this and consider it a commercial advantage. Additionally these same enterprises have strict IP policies which prevent the IP from being hosted in the cloud. Win Win. The enterprise product VMware/Xen/…

Any CTO signing off on $37,500USD a year for 150 developers, when you can get unlimited developers on Bitbucket for $2,400, probably needs to be fired.

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#264

Post by mindsocket »

tomphoolery wrote: post #255

JIRA/Stash/et. al isn't so bad, but I definitely prefer using GitHub Issues or Trello for my own projects. ZenHub looks pretty cool too. Definitely think the way that we use JIRA at my office is the only way to use it "right", in the sense that we basically track everything with JIRA tickets, from IT maintenance requests to operations bugs and project management tasks. The automation between JIRA and Stash is also 10…

I'm a product manager for Stash, and was curious about your expected Stash/JIRA workflow. Why would a reviewer be assigned to the JIRA ticket? They're assigned to the pull request for the issue that the author is assigned to (who did the work). Are you wanting to have a JIRA-only view of work that needs doing, including review?

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#265

Post by cmullen »

mpdehaan2 wrote: post #179
calcsam wrote: post #41

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…

I'm a bit curious how much GitHub Enterprise is being adopted. Obviously winning someone like IBM and HP (I don't know what they use) would be big. But I see most companies using GitHub private organizations (paid per repo) even when they are sometimes quite large. I might be totally wrong here, but I'm kinda interested in what the split is. Obviously every software company having a huge chance of keeping their priva…

HP has HP ALM and IBM has Rational. HP also uses CollabNet TeamForge for source control in some groups.

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#266

Post by techtivist »

If this valuation is based on the "future potential" of GitHub, I would keep track of GitHub's data ownership policy. I wouldn't be surprised if all of a sudden GitHub decides it owns the commercial rights to all code hosted on GitHub, at least for the free plan ;)

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#267

Post by vdaniuk »

peteretep wrote: post #263
ghuntley wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, you are right on point. Developers use the commodity version at home and want to use the same (awesome) tools in the workplace. Enterprise companies who wish to differentiate their hiring/talent pipeline recognise this and consider it a commercial advantage. Additionally these same enterprises have strict IP policies which prevent the IP from being hosted in the cloud. Win Win. The enterprise product VMware/Xen/…

Any CTO signing off on $37,500USD a year for 150 developers, when you can get unlimited developers on Bitbucket for $2,400, probably needs to be fired.

Are you sure?

The price of the Github's service is ~$20.8 per developer per month. This is about 10-30 minutes of developers time worth per month. Adapting to Bitbucket's workflow and learning its UI would take much more time.

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#268

Post by ghuntley »

peteretep wrote: post #263
ghuntley wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, you are right on point. Developers use the commodity version at home and want to use the same (awesome) tools in the workplace. Enterprise companies who wish to differentiate their hiring/talent pipeline recognise this and consider it a commercial advantage. Additionally these same enterprises have strict IP policies which prevent the IP from being hosted in the cloud. Win Win. The enterprise product VMware/Xen/…

Any CTO signing off on $37,500USD a year for 150 developers, when you can get unlimited developers on Bitbucket for $2,400, probably needs to be fired.

I see you have not had much experience with large companies; $37k is nothing there are line managers who can sign off on amounts larger than this :-)

Re: GitHub Raises $250M at $2B Valuation

#270

Post by Retra »

mynameishere wrote: post #227
calcsam wrote: post #41

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…

Github is basically Microsoft Word for programmers That makes no sense at all. It's like the "track changes" feature in Word, maybe. You know--one little feature on a much, much larger tool.

The point is that it is a standard, critical work tool.
Post reply on HN