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

Hello, GitHub

natfriedman.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 671 posts

Re: Hello, GitHub

#101

Post by justadudeama »

Klathmon wrote: post #64
ericabiz wrote: post #7

I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…

I agree, my biggest concerns are: 1. What is happening to Atom? I have tried VS code and don't really like it due to the difference in how the 2 systems are designed to work (Atom being more "plugins are king", VSCode being more "kitchen sink included by first-party"). I'd hate to see my favorite editor lose it's major backing. If MS makes a commitment to continue to develop Atom, or they work with someone else to "t…

This is my thinking as well. Do I bail ship to gitlab and support more open software, or do I try to stay centralized?

Re: Hello, GitHub

#102

Post by mitochondrion »

sarreph wrote: post #75
bad_user wrote: post #13

So I’m kind of depressed about this. I loved GitHub enough that I paid for a subscription without needing it and have all of my public work on it and my investment in OSS is quite significant. People saying that it is easy to migrate don’t know what they are talking about. GitHub isn’t just Git hosting, but a social network of open source developers and projects. You can’t migrate stars, issues with comments and the…

You make a good point about the just-move-to-Git[whatever] being the entrenched social aspect of many repos! I can't imagine if, say the day comes when developers flee GH en-masse, it will be at all easy to retain the discussion history behind repos.

Why not just scrape the site? I don’t see what the problem is.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#103

Post by nodesocket »

TooBrokeToBeg wrote: post #30
bauerd wrote: post #18

>My name is Nat and I’ve been a developer since I was six Oh come on give me a break

'New' tall thin young white guy face of the company. Why the picture? Transparent pandering. Welcome to MSFT.

You realize this is just a racist and bigoted at the "other-side" I am sure you call deplorable.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#104

Post by badminton1 »

dboon wrote: post #79
badminton1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/06/02/ballmer_linux_is_a_... Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO said: "Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches" That is a direct attack to open source licensing and open source software. Microsoft had to take that back after they were beaten in the market and lost popularity among developers. Now it's plan B: govern open source pro…

That article is written using very inflammatory language -- I am very wary to take it at face value, because an author using this kind of language is very unlikely to deeply analyze what Ballmer actually said. Furthermore, this was said two decades ago. Take it with a grain of salt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

Some brief history refresher:

- Apple + Microsoft "collaborating" on Macintosh software = Windows

- IBM + Microsoft "collaborating" on OS/2 = the NT kernel, Windows NT

- Sybase + Microsoft "collaborating" on Sybase SQL server = MS SQL Server

- Sun + Microsoft "embracing" Java = .NET Framework

"Take it with a grain of salt".

Re: Hello, GitHub

#105

Post by andyburke »

irrational wrote: post #68
giancarlostoro wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad they're doing this. If anything the only ones misbehaving are the skeptics making claims they'll likely be disproved over. Also has been noted if they had issues with this happening they should of never used GitHub to begin with. I guess devs are religious about git hosting platforms aside from text editors and programming languages.

This is a serious question. How old are you? I'm wondering if you were a developer during the 1990s when MS was at its worst. I was and I still harbor deep hatred for all things MS. I wonder if the rest of the "skeptics" are coming from the same time period and those of you who are saying our concerns are unfounded are from a younger generation.

I'm not the person you're responding to, but I am turning 40 this year. I was also around for the terror that was Microsoft in the 90s when they were competing with Oracle for "company most desperately trying to kill open source".

I had a similar deep hatred for MS.

In the 00s I spent time as a video game developer and I was forced to use MS tools. And honestly, their developer tools were pretty good. Although I still didn't trust them, I respected them (or at least certain divisions within MS).

In the 10s, I've been mostly doing web stuff. Over the last couple of years I've started using VS Code, and it's actually a great editor and MS seems committed to it and to contributing to some other open source projects.

MS does not strike me as anywhere near the same company they were in the 90s as Gates transitioned out and Ballmer took over. Nadella seems to have a vision for MS that's much more in line with what developers actually want. (The irony of Ballmer's "DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!" is palpable.)

I wouldn't consider myself an MS fan, but I also don't view them as the devil they were then. I'm not totally sure what this means for github yet, but I am willing to wait and see before I grab my pitchfork.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#106

Post by leg100 »

gsich wrote: post #66
TooBrokeToBeg wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'New' tall thin young white guy face of the company. Why the picture? Transparent pandering. Welcome to MSFT.

I find it strange that you highlight the "whiteness".

Or tall. Or thin. Or young. Why the emphasis on what one looks like, rather than something deeper, more meaningful, like background, circumstances, class?

There are plenty of poor thin white young tall people out there strugging like most people in life.

Identity politics is dividing us all.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#107

Post by sha90 »

craftyguy wrote: post #69
michielr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There has been nothing but words up to this point. I get your point, but come on, there have been a lot of 'actions' over the last couple of years. This only detracts from your argument. We've had .NET Core, visual studio code, the improvements on Git, WSL and more.

None of those are meaningful contributions to existing platforms/projects that MS does not own outright. They're throwing code of the wall. MS's contributions to git are very light. Edit: clarify my point.

MS is contributing to Electron. They benefit, but so does the wider community. This is generally how OSS works.

Re: Hello, GitHub

#108

Post by dorfsmay »

baldfat wrote: post #26
ericabiz wrote: post #7

I’m going to be a bit contrarian to “the sky is falling” posts on HN and say: I think Microsoft is handling this really well. 1) They’ve acknowledged the skepticism around the acquisition. 2) They’ve expressed their commitment to keep GitHub an independent platform (like they did with LinkedIn.) 3) Nat Friedman, although I was not familiar with him prior to this, seems like an ideal candidate to run GitHub. This, ove…

I really can't think of a better large tech company to buy GitHub (Which has been closed sourced since creation and I don't know why people are so scared). Now Oracle would make me put on my tin foil hat on immediately and deleting of my account.

Because people with closed source, the paying customers, now have to trust their potential biggest competitor with their source code ‽

Re: Hello, GitHub

#109

Post by mitochondrion »

leg100 wrote: post #70
hlmencken wrote: post #16

It was a pleasure but gitlab and bitbucket have continued to improve and I've expected some sort of exit for a while. I appreciate everything the Github team has done, but barring some crazy improvements from Microsoft I think my feet are firmly planted on the GitLab train.

How has gitlab "continued to improve"? They are getting worse. Do you have statistics on their uptime or their performance? Because in my own experience, gitlab.com is going from bad to worse. Their API increasingly returns 503s and timeouts. Their UI is increasingly returning a stale state. One pushes a branch and they say it doesn't exist. One does a git pull and it takes so long one is used to going off and puttin…

Do you not self-host?
Post reply on HN