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

321–330 of 416 posts

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

#321

Post by Cthulhu_ »

anonymousab wrote: post #241
colllectorof wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the outrage. In fact, I think it's a brilliant parody of post-structuralist jargon, self-contradictions and pretentious verbal mannerisms. If you take this repo as a serious attack against feminism I have to point out that as far as I can see the whole thing has no substance and offers no comments on real-life issues. Zero. It satirizes a certain vacuous style of writing . Saying that it threatens feminis…

Perhaps Github do not feel that satire belongs there.

If they didn't then a lot of repos would be removed or censored. If they don't though, then - similar to the 'retard' censorship - they're inconsistent and using double standards (which BTW is also a trait of the SJW subculture the c+= repo parodies)

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

#322

Post by mizzao »

tomschlick wrote: post #156
mizzao wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buying SourceForge and apply a svn-to-git converter on top of everything; that would really cement the monopoly.

And be completely useless. No one wants to use SF anymore.

But what if all SF users had a free and painless transition of their projects to GitHub?

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

#323

Post by jwr »

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 can confirm there is an opening for something new. We use FogBugz (and pay quite a bit for the hosted version), because GitHub issues are too simplistic, and we hate JIRA.

However, FogBugz has its share of problems, and I'd gladly move to something else, if only there was something better. Must-haves that many companies miss are:

* flawless E-mail integration,

* task numbers,

* API that lets me attach code commit links (linking to GitHub) for reviews.

As to why not FogBugz — a number of reasons and annoyances. It's slow, expensive, too complex in many places, we've encountered a number of bugs over the years, and Fog Creek strongly resists changing FogBugz. Even relatively minor changes (we wanted FogBugz to detect cases based on "#1234" case numbers not a "Case #1234" string, because if you don't write in English, writing "case #1234" is unnatural) are refused.

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

#324

Post by danpalmer »

cmullen wrote: post #265
mpdehaan2 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I bet there are at least 3 teams each in HP and IBM that use separate GitHub enterprise installations.

For these companies, using public GitHub isn't even a question. It would cost far more in terms of lawyers, managers, etc to approve use of public GitHub than to just buy an enterprise installation for a department.

Also, just because they have (and sell) a product that does this, doesn't mean that they use it, that it's appropriate, that their devs want to use it, etc. Separate departments in companies of these sizes act like individual companies, IBM even has the term Blue Dollars for money that they spend on other IBM services.

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

#325

Post by djhn »

andruby wrote: post #285
hermanmerman wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well many companies are profitable (actually, it's the only prerequisite to stay alive). And arguably, Github isn't profitable enough to fuel its own growth, or they wouldn't need to take $250m from investors in exchange of shares. The question is: is it worth 2 billion dollars? As a developer my guts say yes, but I have no idea what their numbers look like...

Liquidity for the founders, early employees and previous investors can also be a reason to have another funding round.

What kind of situations would result in previous investors looking for liquidity? Assuming it is a trade for equity, it would be counter-intuitive do divest a fast-growing company if you are at least risk-neutral, which VCs should be?

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

#326

Post by danpalmer »

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…

A lot of companies have regulatory requirements which require them to host a lot of their support services, and for many companies with small dev teams (~1k-10k employees, 10-100 devs), management and policy is strict enough that they will just buy the enterprise version.

Remember that inside the enterprise version, you have full control over all the organisational structure - essentially giving you an extra level of granularity on permissions. That's quite important for many companies.

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

#327

Post by timblair »

findjashua wrote: post #139
toomuchtodo wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comment wasn't intended to make you bite. HipChat is playing catchup constantly with Slack (except the @here feature; Slack was behind the ball on that one). Slack's channel integrations are incredibly smooth. Message delivery is so much more reliable on Slack mobile than HipChat's app ever was (perhaps this was iOS specific?). Message management (stars, pinning, history links I can take from Slack and throw into…

my apologies if my tone come across as combative. Slack: 1. I agree on the part about multiple teams, but since I only use it for work, it hasn't really been much of an issue. 2. I never really had any issues w message delivery, I'm on Android though, and it seems like you're on iOS. 3. I also don't remember having any issues w integrations, do you have a specific example of something that it wasn't able to do? 4. Wh…

Regarding (Slack/4)... I believe that toomuchtodo is talking about the following features within Slack:

* Stars: the ability to privately star individual messages (so you can easily find them again)

* Pinning: the ability to publicly highlight specific messages within a channel, much like pinned posts in a forum (effectively channel-wide starring)

* History links: click on the timestamp next to any Slack message and it'll open a canonical URL for that message, allowing you to drop these links to specific messages or points in a conversation into other chats, GH issues or anywhere else you fancy.

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

#328

Post by andruby »

djhn wrote: post #325
andruby wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liquidity for the founders, early employees and previous investors can also be a reason to have another funding round.

What kind of situations would result in previous investors looking for liquidity? Assuming it is a trade for equity, it would be counter-intuitive do divest a fast-growing company if you are at least risk-neutral, which VCs should be?

Not VC's. But perhaps friends, family or fools who helped on a seed round. Granted, in the case of Github this seems very unlikely.

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

#329

Post by michaelmior »

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…

AFAIK, GitHub uses GitHub to build GitHub. I'd say GitHub is a large project.

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

#330

Post by michaelmior »

shurcooL wrote: post #237
jareds wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Jira can be clunky I don't mind using it since it's pretty much totally accessible to me as a blind developer. I can't say the same for a lot of other products my company used to use. Github is pretty good from an accessibility standpoint as well. One thing I can't figure out how to do in Github is see all forks of a repository. Is this possible to do?

> One thing I can't figure out how to do in Github is see all forks of a repository. Is this possible to do? Yes, just click on the number of forks. It takes you to: https://github.com/golang/go/network Members tab is a simpler enumeration of all forks. https://github.com/golang/go/network/members (Similarly, to see the people who have starred a repo, click on that number.) It's not even hidden in some advanced menu,…

The point and click aspect is potentially significantly complicated by the fact that the parent indicated that he's blind. I've never tried GH with a screen reader, so I'm not sure what the usability is like in that case.
Post reply on HN