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

Thank you, GitHub

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 460 posts

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#201

Post by junon »

lexapro wrote: post #152
junon wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nat is a mogul in SV. Everyone knows him, many even before GitHub. Simply walking away from GitHub without much of a speech would make it seem like he didn't care or left on bad terms, optics-wise. That would have a potentially serious effect on perception and thus shareholders would be affected. This clearly isn't his intent. I offer a contrary point of view: why does it bother you so much? Simply do not read it.

>thus shareholders would be affected Why not just tell it like it is then? Dear shareholders, I'm leaving because I'm rich / bored with Github and not because there was a falling-out. >why does it bother you so much? Simply do not read it. So you're suggesting people should just not read or listen to anything that they don't like? And just keep quiet?

> Why not just tell it like it is then?

Because what you suggested is extremely impersonal, arrogant, harsh, cold, and dismissive of the work of all the employees working under you.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#203

Post by lmickh »

outside1234 wrote: post #61
m0zg wrote: post #43

I'm kinda worried about GH now. I actually worked at MS over a decade ago. They had a pattern at the time which routinely drove their acquisitions into the ground. It went something like this: an acquisition happens, and in order for folks who matter to not jump ship immediately, the acquired company would be allowed to operate semi-autonomously for a while. A year, year and a half sharks from Microsoft proper would…

This one does seem to be different. Github is held at arms length from the rest of Microsoft (like LinkedIn) such that all of this sort of interference can't happen currently. It will be interesting to see if they can keep that up. It is clearly an advantage to have an organization that can think "developers first" and not Azure, Windows, or whatever first.

Hundreds of developers were moved from Azure teams to the GitHub org about a year or so ago. Several new features they have added are effectively rebranding/built on top of other Azure projects.

GitHub is hardly at arms length from MS.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#204

Post by aigo »

lxe wrote: post #185

Post titles like these are HN's flavor of clickbait. I get that it's the title of the article, but it doesn't mean it should be the title of the post.

As a newer user that's actually one of the things I love about HN, that people accurately and succinctly summarise the link's content in the title. And if not, someone will ask them to do so in the comments.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#205

Post by fnord123 »

orliesaurus wrote: post #30

If person's legacy is a list of all the good things (or bad things) they've done during their time, Nat's legacy as the CEO of GitHub can also be summed into a list. Let me get started...I only remember this one thing but other users of HN can help add more I supposed: - That one time when Nat spoke against DMCA law and said taking down youtube-dl was wrong and he actively pushed for their reinstatement. [1] [1] http…

Nat has done a great job of embracing the ideals that many if us respect. I look forward to watching Thomas continue to extend Githubs influence in open source and productivity.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#206

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #184

As acquisitions go, this has probably been one of the best executed ones in recent history. MS deserves a lot of credit for having managed that very well. And I'm sure a lot of that is also due to Nat's management.

I'll take the "con" side. A lot of the core Rubyists left for Shopify after the sale, and I'm sure Nat had a contract to stay on for X amount of time, where Microsoft would make no major changes. Now that this is expiring, I fully expect Microsoft to start making changes with the site that will appeal to large corporations, at the expense of what I would prefer, as an individual user. I guess time will tell.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#207

Post by jassmith87 »

ksec wrote: post #144
tiffanyh wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what happened here. Nat founded Xamarin which was acquired by Microsoft in 2016. Github was acquired in 2018 and Nat was already an Microsoft employee at time. So Nat departing now is actually 5 years post the Xamarin acquisition (when he joined Microsoft). https://www.linkedin.com/in/natfriedman/ EDIT: what's also interesting is that Thomas Dohmke joined Microsoft in 2015, moved to the Github division aro…

I wonder if he stick with Microsoft long enough would he have a chance of becoming the next M$ CEO.

Many people within Microsoft felt that he was a clear contender for Satya's eventual successor.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#208

Post by est31 »

junon wrote: post #91
est31 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 2018, MS had 110 billion USD in revenue, while Github had 200-300 million USD. So the Github business is <0.5% of MS's revenue.

Money is not the only part of any large acquisition such as GitHub. Given Microsoft's history, GitHub was the perfect acquisition for their goals.

Sure it was, and for MS there is definitely strategic value in owning Github. But I even if you factor in that strategic value, Github is not as important to Microsoft as, say, Instagram is to Facebook.

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#209

Post by EscargotCult »

Yuioup wrote: post #109
nodejs_rulez_1 wrote: post #93

Stayed long enough to screw up the Azure DevOps future, but not long enough to make GitHub a viable alternative.

Staying on this subject, how is the Azure DevOps phase-out going? When can I expect to see a "migrate now!" button?

I wouldn't be surprised if it takes years for the phase-out, if it ever gets phased out at all. There is a particular type of organizational culture that believes having the "big" option for a productivity tool is the best option. AzDO feels like the "big" option. It is quite customizable and can emulate (and in some areas surpass) GitHub's functionality, but at the expense of having more knobs. To me, AzDO feels like the inside of a space shuttle, but I'm certain that this complexity is seen as a strength to some orgs.

In CI-land, though, I think GitHub Actions and Azure Pipelines fates are much more closely intertwined. The Microsoft-hosted runners for Azure Pipelines have the same environment as GitHub Actions (or perhaps it's GitHub Actions that's standing on the shoulders of Azure Pipelines)[1].

1: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/devops/pipelines/agen...

Re: Thank you, GitHub

#210

Post by Dangeranger »

kylemh wrote: post #202
Dangeranger wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nat posted publicly on this topic back in 2019 [0]. [0] https://github.blog/2019-10-09-github-and-us-government-deve...

Sure, but ICE is still a customer

Correct. I'm not saying he "fixed" the problem, but that he made his and the companies positions more clear.
Post reply on HN