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

GitHub Package Registry

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 389 posts

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#211

Post by philliphaydon »

rectang wrote: post #101
bluGill wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS's core competency has always been developers. IBM called Microsoft for BASIC back in the day because without MS BASIC their computer was DOA to a lot of potential customers.

> MS's core competency has always been developers. As a developer who still has to work very hard to forgive MS for all the pain IE6 put me through a decade ago, this grates on my ears, even though I understand that it might be true in the abstract. Classically, MS has been good to developers who agree to be chained to their platform, but has made life extremely difficult for developers who want or need to be platfor…

Yet MS introduced us to Ajax and CSS Grids.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#212

Post by soulofmischief »

sho_hn wrote: post #127
_bxg1 wrote: post #115

There's something slightly concerning about ceding responsibility for distributing the world's open-source projects from a family of strong independent repositories to a centralized platform owned by a tech giant.

Yes, but that's not a new concern - to some, GitHub has always represented an anathema to what git was supposed to be and bring. Centralization at a proprietary vendor, instead of open systems interacting. Then locking people in further by network effect and adding centralized products around git. That it's become so popular many people equate GitHub with git adds insult to injury. I completely understand why this al…

I just wish a PR and issue tracking system with pluggable credentials had been simultaneously developed and implemented alongside git, so that I could migrate my issue and PR history, or plug them in to multiple hosts.

I prefer Gitlab for a multitude of reasons but since all the action takes place on Github, my Gitlab account just serves as a repo mirror.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#213

Post by soulofmischief »

toyg wrote: post #178
tedivm wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Linus introduced git he didn't seem to care at all about decentralizing from a political standpoint, just from a "I can work on this from my laptop without an internet connection" point of view.

That's the thing - git was fundamentally a tool borne with an asynchronous workflow in mind: I work on X, Alice works on Y, Bob works on Z, and the eventual merging (which might happen days or weeks later) should be as simple as possible - without worrying about who checked out what. Git was dropped in the "distributed VCS" bucket, but decentralization was a secondary effect of the workflow Linus wanted to achieve. G…

A git service built on IPFS or something similar would be wicked. It does take quite a bit of engineering (money) to compete with the big boys, however.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#214

Post by soulofmischief »

rasz wrote: post #162
_bxg1 wrote: post #115

There's something slightly concerning about ceding responsibility for distributing the world's open-source projects from a family of strong independent repositories to a centralized platform owned by a tech giant.

Microsoft is just trying hard to achieve Antitrust(movie) villain goals, Github plus "telemetry" is a pretty good coverage.

Github is primarily composed of public data that Microsoft could scrape without a $7.5B investment.

There are a lot of moving parts to this and it's impossible to distill it down to a single sentence or even paragraph.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#215

Post by soulofmischief »

pornel wrote: post #117

I worry about npm now. The huge public registry everyone loves is run off investor's money and subsidized by npm's private registry product. But npm has recently changed their nice-people-matter CEO to a now-print-money dude, so I suspect investors' patience has run out. And now GitHub went directly after the one thing that npm is supposed to be making money on.

I don't worry about npm. I for one can't wait to move to a different registry.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#216

Post by chupasaurus »

toyg wrote: post #178
tedivm wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Linus introduced git he didn't seem to care at all about decentralizing from a political standpoint, just from a "I can work on this from my laptop without an internet connection" point of view.

That's the thing - git was fundamentally a tool borne with an asynchronous workflow in mind: I work on X, Alice works on Y, Bob works on Z, and the eventual merging (which might happen days or weeks later) should be as simple as possible - without worrying about who checked out what. Git was dropped in the "distributed VCS" bucket, but decentralization was a secondary effect of the workflow Linus wanted to achieve. G…

> decentralization was a secondary effect of the workflow Linus wanted to achieve.

Linus didn't want to achieve a change in workflow of kernel development, he just made a tool to make which would ease the pain, Linux development was decentralized since forever.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#217

Post by chupasaurus »

soulofmischief wrote: post #213
toyg wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing - git was fundamentally a tool borne with an asynchronous workflow in mind: I work on X, Alice works on Y, Bob works on Z, and the eventual merging (which might happen days or weeks later) should be as simple as possible - without worrying about who checked out what. Git was dropped in the "distributed VCS" bucket, but decentralization was a secondary effect of the workflow Linus wanted to achieve. G…

A git service built on IPFS or something similar would be wicked. It does take quite a bit of engineering (money) to compete with the big boys, however.

The first project provided by DDG to me was Radicle[https://radicle.xyz/]

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#218

Post by neurotrace »

yes_man wrote: post #157

Is centralization of open source a good thing for the world or not? This thread seems to be overwhelmingly positive. And in the end we all will be critisizing it if all package repositories will be handled by a single entity. And that entity that is being applauded here in this case happens to be the most valuable corporation in the world right now. Healthy skepticism seems to be a disappearing attribute in the tech…

Seriously. I love Github but I don't know how to feel about a megacorp becoming the de facto source for packages in the open source ecosystem. It could be great but many of us thought that consolidating all of our social activities under the Facebook umbrella was going to be great

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#219

Post by memmcgee »

franky47 wrote: post #54

While the technical side of the news is interesting, the organisational repercussions worry me. Microsoft (who owns GitHub) is already one of the largest tech companies, and I would not be surprised if this move was intended to weaken NPM and Docker in an attempt to acquire them. I fear a future where everything one requires to develop "socially" depends on a single super-entity. GitHub and VSCode were the first step…

That would make sense as a worst case scenario but I'm not sure the evidence suggests that's the route they're going. If they wanted to acquire a CI/CD product, they would've bought Travis when it was being shopped around for a buyout.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#220

Post by memmcgee »

owaislone wrote: post #83
mikepurvis wrote: post #24

Looks like Docker, node/npm, ruby/gems, java/maven, and nuget... but no Python? Seems an odd choice for the one to leave out.

Github has traditionally been a Ruby shop and once you are a Ruby shop, you can use Ruby to do anything that you could use Python for so there is no need to touch Python other than may be data science. That means they would have built a lot of expertise in Ruby and comparatively very little with Python. So it's understandable that they are able to add support for Ruby before python. It must have been easier to do for…

Doesn't Go already download packages from GitHub?
Post reply on HN