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

171–180 of 389 posts

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#171

Post by ilaksh »

yes_man wrote: post #157

Is centralization of open source a good thing for the world or not? This thread seems to be overwhelmingly positive. And in the end we all will be critisizing it if all package repositories will be handled by a single entity. And that entity that is being applauded here in this case happens to be the most valuable corporation in the world right now. Healthy skepticism seems to be a disappearing attribute in the tech…

I suspect part of it is the Microsoft fanboy effect.

Also, people strangely do not seem to be aware of the potential of truly decentralized p2p technologies to provide alternatives.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#172

Post by mikepurvis »

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.

Third party proprietary tools like bintray/artifactory manage to do it without too much trouble. Honestly, there aren't really that many formats to support for Python these days— if you don't mind kicking some legacy to the curb, sdist, bdist, and whl pretty much covers it— any other splintering of the ecosystem is on the tooling side, but all the tools that matter still generate one or more of those three formats as the archive.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#173

Post by gouh »

_bxg1 wrote: post #115

There's something slightly concerning about ceding responsibility for distributing the world's open-source projects from a family of strong independent repositories to a centralized platform owned by a tech giant.

Ideally I would like the social aspects of GitHub (trending/popular repository, staring projects, notifications, etc.) but with decentralized hosting. Something that would be to GitHub what Mastodon is to Twitter

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#174

Post by toyg »

koolba wrote: post #112
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…

I think they use SQL Server as well so there’s that poster child angle as well.

Pretty sure it was developed entirely on the MS stack. Jeff Atwood had a few posts about it. At the beginning it was literally one Windows Server machine.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#175

Post by hestefisk »

It looks really cool. The only fear I have is the impact of mono culture if everyone starts using the same repo and it gets compromised. Having a topology of many different repos would make open source less prone to this kind of risk. That said, would be nice with a pkgsrc solution!

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#176

Post by arugulum »

sho_hn wrote: post #127
_bxg1 wrote: post #115

There's something slightly concerning about ceding responsibility for distributing the world's open-source projects from a family of strong independent repositories to a centralized platform owned by a tech giant.

Yes, but that's not a new concern - to some, GitHub has always represented an anathema to what git was supposed to be and bring. Centralization at a proprietary vendor, instead of open systems interacting. Then locking people in further by network effect and adding centralized products around git. That it's become so popular many people equate GitHub with git adds insult to injury. I completely understand why this al…

I have the opposite view: the success of GitHub and the growth of code being open by default with everything running through git has probably brought more people into the git ecosystem than would have otherwise. I primarily use GitHub, but whenever I need something that I need to run myself I know I can fairly seamlessly switch over to something like GitLab.

For example, if GitHub ever started using a very proprietary application, I would just switch over to using regular git, and I'm guessing many others would too.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#177

Post by jacques_chester »

paulddraper wrote: post #164
jacques_chester wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. Unless you consider the URL the namespace, but it's not. It is for docker images. `foo/bar` is implicitly `hub.docker.com/foo/bar`.

True. I think people are pretty well accustomed to that though. Dockerhub, AWS ECR, Google Cloud, etc.

Yes and no. It affects software that's installed via things like Kubernetes pod definitions. You need to "relocate" images to the correct registry in that case.

This is a sufficient hassle that one of my colleagues maintains an entire tool devoted entirely to this purpose: https://github.com/pivotal/image-relocation

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#178

Post by toyg »

tedivm wrote: post #152
sho_hn wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but that's not a new concern - to some, GitHub has always represented an anathema to what git was supposed to be and bring. Centralization at a proprietary vendor, instead of open systems interacting. Then locking people in further by network effect and adding centralized products around git. That it's become so popular many people equate GitHub with git adds insult to injury. I completely understand why this al…

When Linus introduced git he didn't seem to care at all about decentralizing from a political standpoint, just from a "I can work on this from my laptop without an internet connection" point of view.

That's the thing - git was fundamentally a tool borne with an asynchronous workflow in mind: I work on X, Alice works on Y, Bob works on Z, and the eventual merging (which might happen days or weeks later) should be as simple as possible - without worrying about who checked out what. Git was dropped in the "distributed VCS" bucket, but decentralization was a secondary effect of the workflow Linus wanted to achieve.

GitHub then took the server-side bits of git, and effectively built a web-based interface with social features on top. Git itself is still very much a decentralized tool (just add a new remote and off you go), only the social GUI is centralized.

It would be cool if somebody could build "Github over P2P" (I guess with a bit of blockchain, because hype). At that point the entire stack would be fully decentralized.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#179

Post by [deleted] »

IceSentry wrote: post #147
ccleve wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey Microsoft, if you're listening, you should throw Sonatype or other Maven-related organizations a few bucks. They deserve it.

Just because Microsoft has a lot of money doesn't mean they can just throw it around. That's not how the world works...

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#180

Post by judge2020 »

OJFord wrote: post #143
dend wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

docs.microsoft.com PM here - thanks for the feedback! It takes some time to update all our search results across the two major search engines. Given that some pages have less traction than others, the more obscure content sometimes still is indexed as if it's coming from MSDN. We have moved most of the library to docs, with redirects in place, so hopefully you won't get too many 404s. If you do - feel free to report…

> the two major search engines What's the second major search engine? I'm genuinely asking, not meaning to poke if it's Bing - I use DDG but just don't have a feel at all for what's most popular after the obvious one. Wikipedia has just 7% market share left for the second, and the rest - thinking about it's probably one that's popular in China and unheard of elsewhere?

Considering Verizon has stated their Yahoo and AOL properties are worthless[0], it's probably Bing and the search engines that rely on it (including DDG).

0; https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/verizon-signals-its-y...

Post reply on HN