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

GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 166 posts

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#131

Post by nailer »

alexchamberlain wrote: post #128
nailer wrote: post #14

After trying new GitHub Desktop Beta mentioned in the article a week ago: it's still nowhere near compete enough to work: - You can only stage all changes in a file - so you can't discard 'console.log('Wooo'); debugger;' when committing, you have to remove those in your editor first, then commit. - you can't reverse commits. Need to roll HEAD back to a previous commit, push those fixes, then resume what you were work…

These sound like advance features that you can easily drop down to the CLI for.

They're pretty common for me, but how are advanced usage and using a CLI related? These seem orthogonal to me.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#132

Post by lilactown »

eridius wrote: post #121
j_m_b wrote: post #83

I've recently been exploring GraphQL. It's an excellent way to design and maintain Web APIs imo. GitHub is a great resource for learning how GraphQL works. I've been using the GraphiQL tool to experiment with it. However, there is a big issue with the GraphQL implementation in that requests using the POST method work, but the mirror GET requests do not return the same results. For example, see the response for the si…

GET requests don't have HTTP bodies. How are you passing that JSON string in a GET request?

It gets serialized into the URL.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#133

Post by jtmcmc »

cyphar wrote: post #88

I just got an advertising email about this from GitHub, even though I've never subscribed to GitHub advertising mail. I just checked my email settings and it looks like GitHub has added a new option (defaulting to being "on" of course) that auto-subscribes you to spam. Surely the unsubscription laws don't allow you to retroactively add more options that are defaulted to being on that subscribe you to things you were…

it's going to depend where you live. In the united states no opt-in is required for sending marketing email - https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/can...

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#134

Post by stephenr »

moron4hire wrote: post #100
hashkb wrote: post #68

The shameless support posts by execs/founders at launch partners are slimy! You guys should be ashamed. This isn't your marketing site, it's for discussion.

So what the hell is "Show HN" but marketing?

Show HN is expected to be submitted by the person who made the thing to show, and it's expected that they're showing it for a reason: it's either new, or had a significant change.

Edit: So technically, GH probably could have had their new shit posted as a Show HN: but you generally want that to be something people can 'play' with right away, not a blog post about a way to pay more for the same things. /Edit

My best guess with what happened here (based on the similarity of the texts) is that GH arranged a pre-formatted 'base' text, with placeholders, sent it to each of the involved CEOs/whatevers and said "we will submit our story to HN, once we do please comment using this template".

Every one of the comments basically matches this pseudo-regex: " (at|from) [1] ..... one of the ([:digit:] )? launch partners" and the [1] is referenced as a link to GitHub Marketplace. Only one has a link to their own site.

The HN story itself was submitted by someone who at least used to be, and based on that, likely still is a GH employee.

I assume they were trying to drum up lots of positive attention about this with the cool-kid me-too cargo-culting developer set that makes up a large part of HN readers.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#135

Post by kardon33 »

mrinterweb wrote: post #118

The thing I'd like to see Github focus on with their API is granular permissions. There are many SASS integrations that I am just not comfortable with granting access to because I don't want to have any more than necessary 3rd parties having access to repositories. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but every time I grant an application access to my Github account, it automatically has access to all repositories I have…

+1 this a thousand times. The only way i have found to effectively lock things down is using an org and creating a new Github user just for third-party integrations.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#136

Post by stephenr »

devhead wrote: post #106
robzyb wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TravisCI Pro Bootstrap direct is $69: https://travis-ci.com/plans TravisCI Pro Bootstrap via Github is $89: https://github.com/marketplace/travis-ci/plan/MDIyOk1hcmtldH...

any indication why the prices are different? it's not like they think we won't sniff that out, right?

It's different because GH take a cut of any sales via the Marketplace.

People already pay anywhere from 3-10x more for GH than for alternatives like BitBucket. I'm sure plenty will just click on 'buy'.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#137

Post by Kequc »

kardon33 wrote: post #135
mrinterweb wrote: post #118

The thing I'd like to see Github focus on with their API is granular permissions. There are many SASS integrations that I am just not comfortable with granting access to because I don't want to have any more than necessary 3rd parties having access to repositories. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but every time I grant an application access to my Github account, it automatically has access to all repositories I have…

+1 this a thousand times. The only way i have found to effectively lock things down is using an org and creating a new Github user just for third-party integrations.

Bitbucket is fast, and I believe focuses on repository permissions. Have you tried them?

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#138

Post by timhaines »

mrinterweb wrote: post #118

The thing I'd like to see Github focus on with their API is granular permissions. There are many SASS integrations that I am just not comfortable with granting access to because I don't want to have any more than necessary 3rd parties having access to repositories. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but every time I grant an application access to my Github account, it automatically has access to all repositories I have…

GitHub Apps (was called Integrations until today) allows for 'per repository' configuration. We use it at Percy.io and it works pretty well. It has some other parts that need smoothing (like a non-admin going through the flow), but GitHub's been improving it. :) I like it a lot.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#139

Post by kardon33 »

Kequc wrote: post #137
kardon33 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 this a thousand times. The only way i have found to effectively lock things down is using an org and creating a new Github user just for third-party integrations.

Bitbucket is fast, and I believe focuses on repository permissions. Have you tried them?

Yes, though it has been a year or two. However it's more of a personal preference / fits within my normal work routine to use GH. I have a number of OS repos that, for community reasons, need to stay on GH, then most of my normal work is on GH which is generally where the concerns come in from a security standpoint.

Re: GitHub announcements: Marketplace, Apps and GraphQL API

#140

Post by keavy »

mrinterweb wrote: post #118

The thing I'd like to see Github focus on with their API is granular permissions. There are many SASS integrations that I am just not comfortable with granting access to because I don't want to have any more than necessary 3rd parties having access to repositories. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but every time I grant an application access to my Github account, it automatically has access to all repositories I have…

Hey! Just in case you missed it, the new GitHub Apps might be a suitable alternative for you - they can have granular permissions (https://developer.github.com/v3/apps/permissions/), so the app can select just enough permissions that it needs. For example, a GitHub App could request permissions to write issues, but not read your code - which isn't possible with OAuth Apps and scopes, as you mention. You also install them on a per repository basis, so you can pick and choose that access. Mostly these are for the app to carry out actions as itself (e.g. create a status, write an issue comment, run a build), but some actions as an authorized user are allowed just now. There's more info on them here: https://developer.github.com/apps/building-integrations/sett...
Post reply on HN