Live data from Hacker News

Introducing unlimited private repositories

github.com

221–230 of 662 posts

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#221
post #189
post #111

What's the difference between a GIT server and say a HTTP server? To my understanding, Github are unable to scale GIT, so they have to price accordingly.

This is not how pricing works.

You would need a lot of margin to not base the price on the production costs. If 200 users cost double as much as 100 users, it's hard to not base the price on number of users.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you no longer want/need the social aspects of GitHub, you can just move to GitLab. Much more affordable and you can self host it yourself. We have an on premise GitLab installation. Besides the rare upgrade, it's pretty hands off. And it's costing us $0 in licensing fees for over 60 users ;-)

I looked at GitLab, it seems to come off second best in terms of features [1]. [1] https://www.visualstudio.com/get-started/overview-of-get-sta... Hard to argue with free though, if that's what you're looking for.

I've always found VSTS to be at the same time expensive, bloated and missing essential functionality. I think the mentality of .NET / Microsoft developers is strange. By following Microsoft's lead, wherever that may take you, you're missing out and you don't even know what :-P

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#223
As a solo developer who had currently paid up for monthly access annually, I feel obligated to feed back that this is pretty good news for me. Go github.

The 5 private repositories was a bit grating and making me considering a move elsewhere. I was going to have to consider changing how I stored/structured my projects in order to stay under what seemed to me to a relatively arbitrary limit, which interfered with some of my automated tools and how I'd set them up to assume a separate repository for each project.

I realise there are a number of bigger organisations for whom this realistically means a hike in prices, and I'm winning relative to their losing, but as someone who wants to keep advantages to the little guys (that's the genuinely little guys, not a bunch of 50-100 guys bankrolled by several SV millionaires/billionaires)...well, I feel its my duty to weigh in with positive feedback against what is probably going to be some negativity from the bigger guys...

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#224
post #165

This has almost quadrupled our monthly cost ($850 vs $2914). We have ~300 users which will have to be reduced massively to save costs - perhaps with non-engineers sharing accounts or having no access at all. I'm not sure if charging per user is really in the spirit of open collaboration that GitHub champions. I slo wonder if charging per user rather than per repo will also discourage the creation of open-source repos…

You have 300 employees and an extra $6/mo/em is going to break you? How much do you spend on toilet paper? :)

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#226

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…

> This is a good deal for small organizations that like to have many small repositories (for internal libraries, utilities, micro services, modules, etc).

I'm a small contracting shop: makes more sense to me. I might have 100 repos, but I can only develop so fast. Now all I'm costing GitHub is a little diskspace (which is insanely cheap, especially for text).

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#228
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you clarify? Why is Bitbucket "terrible"?

He probably means in terms of general usability. This is the reason why I don't use bitbucket at all, and I'm happy to give some money to github in exchange for their service. Bitbucket's issue tracker is such a pain to work with. I remember being redirected to a new page whenever I had to create a new tag. Then I'd loose the content of the issue I had started to write, something like that.

you are doing it wrong. If you want issue management you will buy Jira from the same company which is superior to github. Bitbucket is one tool of many for Atlassian.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#229

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…

I personally like the bitbucket method.

I get my private repos free, but I can only work with 5 people on them before I have to start paying.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#230
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compared to products like Salesforce, GitHub seems cheap to me. What to you is a fair price and why?

As stated at the end of my comment, a fair price is what they decide to charge. I simply don't like people to try and spin a price increase into a freebie.

You seem to be ignoring the comments to the contrary made on your original comment when stating this.

Sure it's going to cost some orgs more, and it makes sense that it does. I'd wager that data at rest (lots of repos) costs a hell of lot less to run than active requests (lots of users).

Personally my bill will be going down from $25 to $7, and I'm fine with that.

My companies bill will be going down from $650/month to $583/month.

Post reply on HN