Introducing unlimited private repositories • Hacker News Board

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#191

Post by endymi0n » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:21 AM UTC

asher_ wrote: post #183

cstejerean wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This was exactly the reason we used Bitbucket in the beginning, even if it was worse in some aspects. Github would have been simply too expensive (or restricting) with our "it's always in source control" approach, even for smaller prototypes.

We're happy Gitlab users now by the way - and I'm curious how long Github will survive with their over-valuation as the alternatives get seriously better now - the lock-in and network effects are quite shallow IMHO.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#192

Post by erikrothoff » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:22 AM UTC

This is awesome! I'm currently paying 50 USD per month for more repos on my private account. Definitely the right way to go.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#193

Post by 0xmohit » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:22 AM UTC

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…

It's possible that people have started realizing the advantages of monolithic version control [0] which prompted Github.

Team | Cost Before | Cost Now

1 repo, 100 users | $25 | $880

[0] http://danluu.com/monorepo/

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#194

Post by wlk » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:23 AM UTC

t3nary wrote: post #12

Does anyone know if this will effect student plans as well? So far it included a free micro plan with the usual 5 private repos. Would be pretty awesome, I just had to host a repo somewhere else a few days ago because I ran out of private repos. Other than that it sounds like a great improvement, it'll make it a lot more likely that I'll pay for GitHub when I'm not a student anymore. /edit: https://github.com/pricing…

Yes, students will also get unlimited private repos.

Confirmation here: https://www.facebook.com/GitHubEducation/posts/5987704836162...

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#195

Post by ProblemFactory » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:24 AM UTC

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…

> But I'd appreciate if their PR department didn't expect us to swallow this as a positive change.

I don't have any numbers on how people structure their accounts on Github, but my feeling is that this is a positive change for the majority of Github users.

Git encourages having many smaller repos for modules over massive single repos. $1/repo/month is fine for active projects, but gets expensive really fast if you want to keep archives of small private experiments around. Because of the per-repo pricing on Github, I've seen many friends and startups I've worked with keeping their open-source public repos on Github (for free), while moving private repos to Bitbucket.

I would not be surprised if this pricing change would be a net revenue loss for Github, but still implemented to avoid losing market share to Bitbucket.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#196

Post by kapv89 » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:27 AM UTC

Nothing beats https://bitbucket.org/ when it comes to free, unlimited, private repositories. It has seen the first hosted repositories of far more startups than github ever will. Which is special achievement in itself.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#197

Post by tyingq » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:27 AM UTC

If you happen to be a group that will be affected negatively by this move because you have a need for read-only users...

Gogs has mirror functionality where you could self-host access for those users in a fairly painless way. Screenshot of import screen: http://i.imgur.com/J4vWCIB.png

More on gogs here: https://github.com/gogits/gogs

(no association with gogs, just thought it might be helpful)

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#198

Post by joeblau » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:27 AM UTC

I just had a discussion with my buddy about repositories yesterday. He wanted access to some code I had for uploading CSV files to iCloud and it's hosted on a private repo on GitHub. He was saying "I still use BitBucket's private repos"; My response was that the GitHub community is a lot stronger. Outside of community, it was hard for me to convince him that GitHub is worth it.

I've been using GitHub for a few years now to host private and public repos and paid private repos was always a point of contention. Now that they are unlimited, I can say that GitHub is definitely going to be the home to all of my future projects. I really feel like GitHub has been kicking it up a notch in 2016. Awesome work team and thanks!

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#199

Post by spraak » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:28 AM UTC

Sephr wrote: post #89

bkeepers wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are reaching out to customers that are in unique situations such as the one you're mentioning here. If you have questions about how the pricing changes affect you, please don’t hesitate to contact support@github.com.

If you need to give Epic Games special treatment just because they have a huge amount of outside collaborators, then your pricing model is broken. It would be more fair to charge $9/mo per organization member + $1/mo per active outside collaborator (somewhat similar to AWS CodeCommit) than to charge for every single active and inactive member and collaborator equally. Maybe throw in a 50% bulk discount for active out…

Ho but they can give to consultancies too

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#200

Post by spraak » Wed, May 11, 2016, 10:29 AM UTC

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…

Best reply ITT