191–200 of 386 posts
GitLab team on other hand is unyielding, they love adding their "Closes #" in MRs and don't care about people that ask to get rid of it.
What is this referring to? Is GitLab using AI to guess which issue a merge request is meant to fix?
I guess it's time to consider ditching GitHub. Everything that are purchased by Microsoft ware destined to be rotten.
What are some good alternatives for closed source codebases that people have been using and enjoying? I only ask because I already know of good alternatives for FOSS, but it's the private / work projects that keep me tethered to GH for now.
To me, GitHub only makes sense as a social media site for code. If you are publishing to GitHub with no intent to be open in your code, development process, and contributor roster, then I don't see the point of being on GitHub at all.
Because it's not like their issue tracker is particularly good. It's not like their documentation support is particularly good. It's not like their search is particularly good. It's CI/CD system is bonkers. There are so many problems with using GitHub for its own sake that the only reason I can see to be there is for the network effects.
So, with that in mind, why not just setup a cheap VPS somewhere with a bare git repo? It'll be cheaper than GitHub and you don't have to worry about the LLM mind virus taking over management of your VPS and injecting this kind of junk on you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even aside from that, what are we doing centralizing FOSS project hosting on a closed source Microsoft platform?
It was much better than the closed source SourceForge which existed before it. A lot of small projects dont have the energy to self host. Plus for small projects the barrier of entry is an issue. I recently found a typo in an error message in Garage but since they run their own Forgejo instance and OpenID never really became a thing I never created a PR. It is first now with Codeberg there is a credible alternative.…
If you blanch at the thought of a one line in a pull request just wait until you see what Sourceforge looked like, release download pages where you had to paying keen attention to what you clicked on because the legit download button was surrounded by banner ads made to look like download buttons but they instead take you to a malware installer. They then doubled down on that by wrapping Windows installers people published with their own Windows installer that would offer to install a variety of things you didn't want before the thing you did.
I guess it's time to consider ditching GitHub. Everything that are purchased by Microsoft ware destined to be rotten.
What are some good alternatives for closed source codebases that people have been using and enjoying? I only ask because I already know of good alternatives for FOSS, but it's the private / work projects that keep me tethered to GH for now.
I now start with local repos first and whatever I deem OSS-useful, I mirror-push from local to Github or anywhere else with forgejo.
Github was never really needed to use git for private projects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ca. everyone here Every time someone claims “everyone on HN thought X”, I go back to check and find out that it was not true and that the discussions had both people in favour and against. Every time. But this case is particularly bad, I’m checking the top voted comments and so far the feeling is of dread and wariness, the complete opposite of what you claim. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17227286 I really w…
Well, yes, that sentence definitely simplified matters a bit. The fact is though, that those who expressed concerns about Microsoft - in that particular thread, and in others - were generally ridiculed in roughly the tone I imitated in my original post. Of course there were people raising concerns, though. I figured that was pretty obvious in my original post. If there hadn't been any people raising concerns, nobody…
The fact the top voted comments are wary of Microsoft suggests otherwise. When people agree, they upvote and seldom comment. Of course responses are contrarian (that’s mostly when you have something to add), but that doesn’t mean that view is prevalent.
> If there hadn't been any people raising concerns, nobody would have had to dismiss them - condescendingly or not.
OK, yes, fair.
> So yes, I (incorrectly) used the word "everyone" to mean "a lot of people" (…) and in a way I've seen it used before in English so many times
It’s perfectly fine to use “everyone” and “no one” to mean “the overwhelming majority”. As in, not literally everyone but enough that the outliers are a rounding error. For example: “no one wants ants biting their genitals” (I’m sure you’ll find someone who wants that, but it’s pretty safe to assume the overwhelming majority of people don’t). But I don’t think it’s OK to use “everyone” to mean “a lot of people”. A lot of people live in China, but it would be ridiculous to say “everyone is Chinese”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At a certain point, quotes (like any other part of language) get a new meaning, sometimes the opposite of what they originally stood for. Like any popular saying, whatever they were in reference to is forgotten and they stand and are interpreted on their own. It doesn’t matter what the quote used to invoke if no one using it is thinking of the invocation.
A nice attribute of discussion is the opportunity to see references and quotes through the eyes of other people, perhaps especially if the interpretation is novel.
[flagged]
"You're just a bunch of fanatic, Linux obsessed Microsoft haters living in the past. Microsoft are the good guys now." -- ca. everyone here, during the GitHub acquisition
"Microsoft loves open source now!" Oh, they adore it. Specially once they figure out how to plaster all open source projects with ads...
I have never owned a GitHub account post-M$. :/ Mainly because I always knew Microsoft has always been against FOSS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, yes, that sentence definitely simplified matters a bit. The fact is though, that those who expressed concerns about Microsoft - in that particular thread, and in others - were generally ridiculed in roughly the tone I imitated in my original post. Of course there were people raising concerns, though. I figured that was pretty obvious in my original post. If there hadn't been any people raising concerns, nobody…
> The fact is though, that those who expressed concerns about Microsoft - in that particular thread, and in others - were generally ridiculed in roughly the tone I imitated in my original post. The fact the top voted comments are wary of Microsoft suggests otherwise. When people agree, they upvote and seldom comment. Of course responses are contrarian (that’s mostly when you have something to add), but that doesn’t m…