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

Announcing new tools, forums, and features

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 282 posts

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#201

Post by tyre »

sytse wrote: post #190
old-gregg wrote: post #183

This is the example of how hard it can be for companies, especially successful companies, to alter their course even slightly. Github success was about making code repositories pretty and social. But this is no longer enough to keep evolving as a company of their size. Yet the internal product DNA still revolves around repos, so as a result, issues, wikis and now Projects (!) live under a single repository. This is b…

I agree that putting projects under repositories looks counterintuitive. In BitBucket you have multiple repositories under one project https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/projects-79249795... We at GitLab are trying to keep it simple by having only one repository, one wiki, one issue tracker, one CD pipeline, and one set of milestones per project. Projects always below to a group. We aggregate on the group lev…

Meta-comment: As a founder and engineer, I used to give a lot of shit to Social Media as a growth channel.

GitLab staff are "on point" by commenting on anything relevant to their industry (code creation/management) where their target customers are (HN).

To other founders, this is what good marketing looks like.

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#202

Post by luan42 »

bhldr wrote: post #199
sytse wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that putting projects under repositories looks counterintuitive. In BitBucket you have multiple repositories under one project https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/projects-79249795... We at GitLab are trying to keep it simple by having only one repository, one wiki, one issue tracker, one CD pipeline, and one set of milestones per project. Projects always below to a group. We aggregate on the group lev…

Enough with the ads here.

"Gitlab CEO here"

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#203

Post by st3v3r »

hoorayimhelping wrote: post #157
elliotec wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that the pick up in pace of Github's lacking features has been phenomenal, and I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab except rooting for the underdog. Github is the clear industry leader, has been since essentially it's creation. It is very fast and feature-filled. It is the central location for the vast majority of code I use and see. Since the open letter to Github with the complain…

I think particularly here on HN, I've seen a good deal of concern over github's social agenda and the perception that they've hired a lot of non-engineering folks to push that agenda.

I've only seen that among members of the alt-right.

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#204

Post by st3v3r »

dasmoth wrote: post #63

There's some nice stuff here -- probably some of it that I'll use -- but most of this is targeted at organisations (and in particular, managers and administrators) rather than individual developers. Understandable -- it's clearly companies that are paying the bills these days -- but a little disappointing given the extent to which GitHub got big by attracting lone hackers and little open source projects. If somebody…

Why? These features don't change the individual experience at all. You're not forced to use them.

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#205

Post by hiou »

Nimimi wrote: post #97
bentlegen wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Open source* The Enterprise edition features[1] are closed source, and these aren't strictly "enterprise-y" features like SAML authentication. It includes plenty of "basic" workflow features found on GitHub: - Rebase merge requests before merge - Use fast-forward merges when possible - Create templates for issues and merge requests - Display merge request status for builds on Jenkins CI [1] https://about.gitlab.com…

Take a look at Phabricator. It's a former Facebook project and been battle-tested at very large companies for years now. Huge open source projects like Blender, Haskell, Wikimedia and LLVM use it since it's the best open source code review tool and issue tracker. Wikimedia had a lengthy decision process and thoroughly vetted the alternatives. It has many enterprise features including code ownership, issue templates,…

Phabricator is awesome. It felt like it was more for experienced developers or larger organizations when I was using it(in a good way). Something to consider depending on your team.

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#206

Post by sytse »

tyre wrote: post #201
sytse wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that putting projects under repositories looks counterintuitive. In BitBucket you have multiple repositories under one project https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/projects-79249795... We at GitLab are trying to keep it simple by having only one repository, one wiki, one issue tracker, one CD pipeline, and one set of milestones per project. Projects always below to a group. We aggregate on the group lev…

Meta-comment: As a founder and engineer, I used to give a lot of shit to Social Media as a growth channel. GitLab staff are "on point" by commenting on anything relevant to their industry (code creation/management) where their target customers are (HN). To other founders, this is what good marketing looks like.

Thanks Chris. It is a tricky balance not being too noisy (I understand the sentiment of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12502468 ) but I tried to add to the conversation by by sharing our thoughts about the project repo dilemma.

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#207

Post by notatoad »

sytse wrote: post #190
old-gregg wrote: post #183

This is the example of how hard it can be for companies, especially successful companies, to alter their course even slightly. Github success was about making code repositories pretty and social. But this is no longer enough to keep evolving as a company of their size. Yet the internal product DNA still revolves around repos, so as a result, issues, wikis and now Projects (!) live under a single repository. This is b…

I agree that putting projects under repositories looks counterintuitive. In BitBucket you have multiple repositories under one project https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucket/projects-79249795... We at GitLab are trying to keep it simple by having only one repository, one wiki, one issue tracker, one CD pipeline, and one set of milestones per project. Projects always below to a group. We aggregate on the group lev…

> In BitBucket you have multiple repositories under one project

however, unless i'm missing something, a "project" in bitbucket is basically just a folder to group your repositories in. there's no real features associated with it. A github project is project management tools based on a repository.

If GitHub had called their feature something else, (for example, call it "the board") and nobody would be expecting it to be anything other than per-repo.

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#208

Post by gohwell »

moby wrote: post #154
gohwell wrote: post #140

How about diffs on pull request? The biggest gripe I have with github is the inability to compare my feature branch with the branch I'm merging too. The diff you see is comparing the feature branch with the "base" branch which would be stale when working on a dev team.

I want to make sure I capture your feedback correctly, so let me know if this doesn't help: we recently released the ability to change your base branch on a PR. https://github.com/blog/2224-change-the-base-branch-of-a-pul... Let me know if that helps!

Here's an example. It's meant to illustrate 2 developers working on a feature branch based on master and one pulls their code in before the other.

https://github.com/jparmstrong/gittest/pull/3/files

- Two feature branches were created based on master at the same time.

- Branch1: committed a change to readme and it's pulled into master via PR.

- Branch2: committed a change to readme, raised a pull request (PR#3), and the diff doesn't show the line that was added with the branch1 pull request.

In this example, the PR is telling me there's a conflict and I need to merge master with the PR branch (this is good). What it doesn't tell me is where the conflict is.

Solution, merge the base branch into the interim PR branch. The result will show you the conflict and properly represents what would happen if this PR is accepted. (Bitbucket does this)

Thanks for following up.

gist of merge master example output: https://gist.github.com/jparmstrong/07cab1a566c5c1495d7c8e07...

Re: Announcing new tools, forums, and features

#210

Post by nzp »

Nimimi wrote: post #97
bentlegen wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Open source* The Enterprise edition features[1] are closed source, and these aren't strictly "enterprise-y" features like SAML authentication. It includes plenty of "basic" workflow features found on GitHub: - Rebase merge requests before merge - Use fast-forward merges when possible - Create templates for issues and merge requests - Display merge request status for builds on Jenkins CI [1] https://about.gitlab.com…

Take a look at Phabricator. It's a former Facebook project and been battle-tested at very large companies for years now. Huge open source projects like Blender, Haskell, Wikimedia and LLVM use it since it's the best open source code review tool and issue tracker. Wikimedia had a lengthy decision process and thoroughly vetted the alternatives. It has many enterprise features including code ownership, issue templates,…

FreeBSD has been using it too for a few years now. https://reviews.freebsd.org
Post reply on HN