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

Introducing unlimited private repositories

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 662 posts

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#181

Post by chris_wot »

hunvreus wrote: post #130

1. Take a gazillion dollars in funding on an over-hyped valuation, 2. Go through significant organizational changes that end up with the departure of a co-founder (and more suits in the building). 3. Notice that a significant segment of your growth (VC-funded startups) are running out of money. 4. Switch to a user-based pricing to generate more revenue for investors, but spin it as a freebie "Hey! Look at the cool un…

Eh? I was very happy with my micro account, this is pretty awesome! If I ever need to recommend a corporate account, GitHub is pretty much my first choice.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#182

Post by enzanki_ars »

ThatPlayer wrote: post #174
romanovcode wrote: post #83

I see absolutely no reason why one would pay GitHub for private repositories when there is Bitbucket, or much better alternative to GitHub altogether - GitLab.

When people mention GitLab I always wonder if you mean the public hosted GitLab, or running your own GitLab.

Usually, they are referring to the public GitLab as it is a free installation of GitLab Enterprise Edition with free private repositories.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#183

Post by asher_ »

cstejerean wrote: post #171
hunvreus wrote: post #130

1. Take a gazillion dollars in funding on an over-hyped valuation, 2. Go through significant organizational changes that end up with the departure of a co-founder (and more suits in the building). 3. Notice that a significant segment of your growth (VC-funded startups) are running out of money. 4. Switch to a user-based pricing to generate more revenue for investors, but spin it as a freebie "Hey! Look at the cool un…

Per user pricing makes a lot more sense than per repo pricing. This way larger organizations pay more money than smaller ones regardless of how they structure their code. This is a good deal for small organizations that like to have many small repositories (for internal libraries, utilities, micro services, modules, etc). Sure, it screws up a few models that rely on external collaborators to get access to private rep…

I couldn't agree more. It has annoyed me when companies charge more for decisions about how you choose to do something - in this case how you split up your code. Paying per person makes much more sense.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#185

Post by vacri »

Cozumel wrote: post #96
nateguchi wrote: post #5

I'm sure a lot of people will be moving from Bitbucket to this, Bitbucket's plans were great for hundreds of repos, but Github's ecosystem is definitely preferable.

Why? BitBucket is superior in every respect, plus importantly they give free private repos for every user. No price gouging like we're seeing with GitHub.

It's not really price gouging. GitHub's product is GitHub. Atlassian's product is Jira, which nets them a tidy penny, and BitBucket is their loss-leader value-add that they can use to undercut GitHub.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#187

Post by vacri »

majewsky wrote: post #52
voltagex_ wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took a bit of searching to find out what a "Git Request" entailed: "A Git request includes any push or pull that transmits repository objects. The request does not count towards your Git request allowance if there is no object transfer due to local and remote branches being up-to-date." Anyone who's using CodeCommit - have you hit the limits? How much did you go over by?

I don't use CodeCommit, but I doubt that an average developer would be hitting the 2000-request boundary (that's 100 requests per day assuming a 5-day work week). Technical users like a CI might be more problematic.

I think it's 2000 requests overall, and if you add in a few buildplans for each of a few repos, you'll easily hit it. Still, it's not pricey if you do.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#188

Post by jvvw »

arnvald wrote: post #40

A small comparison: Team | Cost Before | Cost Now 1 repo, 5 users | $25 | $25 1 repo, 10 users | $25 | $70 11 repos, 5 users | $50 | $25 11 repos, 10 users | $50 | $70 5 repos, 50 users | $25 | $430 50 repos, 5 users | $100 | $25 50 repos, 50 users | $100 | $430 I'm not sure how common are organizations with few users and large number of repose - I guess software houses that keep old projects (for maintenance and fut…

We have a few users and a large number of repos - small team of developers supporting research projects in a university department.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#190

Post by raphinou »

bad_user wrote: post #129
taspeotis wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep my eye on Microsoft's Visual Studio Team Services. It has a bit of a clunky name and aimed more at enterprises but I think at some point they will position it as a competitor to GitHub. It's free for the first five developers, and no charge for "stakeholder" user accounts. https://www.visualstudio.com/pricing/visual-studio-team-serv... So 29 users would be $182/m (check my maths) and you'd pay nothing for the…

If you no longer want/need the social aspects of GitHub, you can just move to GitLab. Much more affordable and you can self host it yourself. We have an on premise GitLab installation. Besides the rare upgrade, it's pretty hands off. And it's costing us $0 in licensing fees for over 60 users ;-)

I started using gitlab.com for that reason, but I will not stay there because it is too slow, to the point it is very annoying.
Post reply on HN