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

GitHub Package Registry

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 389 posts

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#101

Post by rectang »

bluGill wrote: post #38
ben_jones wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you know, it could just focus on its core competencies and be good (great?) at what it does. They don't need to eat the world to provide a positive impact to it...

MS's core competency has always been developers. IBM called Microsoft for BASIC back in the day because without MS BASIC their computer was DOA to a lot of potential customers.

> MS's core competency has always been developers.

As a developer who still has to work very hard to forgive MS for all the pain IE6 put me through a decade ago, this grates on my ears, even though I understand that it might be true in the abstract.

Classically, MS has been good to developers who agree to be chained to their platform, but has made life extremely difficult for developers who want or need to be platform independent.

Platform vendors and developers will forever have conflicting interests.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#102

Post by mevile »

kissgyorgy wrote: post #21

GitHub is coming after GitLab :D They first started with Boards, then Github Actions and now with this.

I love Gitlab, but I think it's good GitHub is taking the threat serious and that we finally have some real competition in this space and not just one dominant player.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#104

Post by kenhwang »

mikepurvis wrote: post #24

Looks like Docker, node/npm, ruby/gems, java/maven, and nuget... but no Python? Seems an odd choice for the one to leave out.

Notice how you were able to call out the de facto package manager for those languages, but didn't for Python? I would imagine supporting the various Python package managers in use would be a bit annoying.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#105

Post by sytse »

foxylion wrote: post #47
prh8 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Gitlab have that this is competing with? I know Gitlab's docker registry but not of a package registry.

Yes, it has a package registry feature for NPM and Maven: Maven: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/packages/maven_repos... NPM: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/packages/npm_registr...

GitLab released integrated packaging back in 2016 - starting with a Docker registry - and adding Maven and NPM in 2018. You can find our plans for adding further packaging capabilities on our public packaging roadmap https://about.gitlab.com/direction/package/

We are also embarking on making package management more secure and auditable for the users of packages with a Dependency Proxy https://about.gitlab.com/direction/package/dependency_proxy/ GitLab users will be able to block and delay packages that are suspect and trace where vulnerable packages were used. This will increase performance, cost efficiency, and the stability of your tests and deployments.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#106

Post by mikey_p »

selrond wrote: post #13

This could solve the trust issues with npm - you never know, whether the package you're installing is really from the source provided on its npm page

This is one of the things I love about Packagist. Technically Composer doesn't care where the source is from, but the official Packagist repository actually just uses Github as the storage and CDN for downloads. You have to link a repo to publish it, and Packagist will only publish source committed to your repo (no build steps, etc). Packagist then uses the zipball downloads for each package for it's source.

Downside of this approach is that almost any PHP project requires you to configure Composer with a personal access token for Github due to the amount of API requests causing rate limiting. Folks sometimes end up wondering why Composer needs an API token to download otherwise public code. (https://getcomposer.org/doc/articles/troubleshooting.md#api-...)

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#107

Post by lvh »

kenhwang wrote: post #104
mikepurvis wrote: post #24

Looks like Docker, node/npm, ruby/gems, java/maven, and nuget... but no Python? Seems an odd choice for the one to leave out.

Notice how you were able to call out the de facto package manager for those languages, but didn't for Python? I would imagine supporting the various Python package managers in use would be a bit annoying.

pip is the default package manager for Python, and while anaconda knows how to install from PyPI, you just pip install things into anaconda environments. So, the answer is "pip".

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#108

Post by pgodzin »

flunhat wrote: post #93
jackfoxy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure speculation, it would not surprise me to wake up someday and see MS has bought Stackoverflow. Given their direction of integrating the entire developer experience, it would make sense. MS is upgrading technical docs across the board, organizing and linking to SO content would make sense.

In light of StackOverflow looking for a new CEO, layoffs in the past year and a half, $68 million in venture capital looking for a return, and Joel Spolsky's connections to Microsoft, this might actually happen. I've also gotten the impression that StackOverflow's recruiting product isn't doing so well. It seems to be a few hundred dollars a month for a single job posting, but the results for recruiters are apparentl…

LinkedIn seems like a good fit

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#109

Post by keerthiko »

I'm really loving the way in which Gitlab and Github are looking to diversify their value-add offerings and auxiliary services without sacrificing any existing basic git functionality or UX, and without aggressively directly competing on the same feature set.

This makes it less of "gitlab or github?" and allows developers to more easily decide to use just one for each project based on whichever service better focuses on the project's primary long-term goals.

If you find yourself in a 2-way split market on a core offering, I think this strategy by both parties is net beneficial for everyone rather than trying to directly compete on all the same features and offerings.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#110

Post by carlosdp »

pgodzin wrote: post #108
flunhat wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In light of StackOverflow looking for a new CEO, layoffs in the past year and a half, $68 million in venture capital looking for a return, and Joel Spolsky's connections to Microsoft, this might actually happen. I've also gotten the impression that StackOverflow's recruiting product isn't doing so well. It seems to be a few hundred dollars a month for a single job posting, but the results for recruiters are apparentl…

LinkedIn seems like a good fit

Well they're already owned by Microsoft, so same deal =P
Post reply on HN