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

Introducing unlimited private repositories

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 662 posts

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#251

Post by smackfu »

odonnellryan wrote: post #224
bsnape wrote: 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? :)

Doesn't say they are employees.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#252

Post by lox »

z3t4 wrote: post #221
lox wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Pricing is a function of what people will pay for it, not what it costs to make. Consider Slack as a fine example.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#253

Post by Xylakant »

biztos wrote: post #247

I find it interesting that so many people here are unhappy with the change. Sure, prices will go up for a lot of organizations, but is $9/worker/month really a lot to pay for all the stuff GitHub offers? At Bay Area prices isn't that about 5 minutes of developer pay per month? For independent use it seems like a very positive change, in fact I'm guessing it's a direct challenge to GitLab. I was considering moving my…

> If I have a private repo and you have a private repo, and we each grant access to the other's repo so we can collaborate, do we now have two or four billing units?

4. Each of you has 2. One for yourself and one for the collaborator. Which answers the question of why some people are unhappy with the change: it punishes organizations that collaborate a lot.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#254

Post by pilif »

heartbreak wrote: post #248
pilif wrote: post #59

The linked page is telling us that eventually, only the new plans will be available. For my case (15 users in the organization, using the bronze plan with a lot of not-so-important repos on our own server), this will be a price increase from $300/y to $1380/y - nearly 5x more expensive. I really hope the old plans stay around as long as possible. Also, consider external collaborators that are part of multiple organiz…

I'll assume that none of your 15 users are software developers and that none of your users live in a first world country. I'll assume you pay a user $15,000 USD per year in salary. $225,000 for all 15 total. Cost of Github: $1,380. New operating costs: $226,380. I see that they have gone up by %0.6. Crushing.

Some of these users are used for various error-reporting tools to report issues as. I'm not paying these any salary, nor are they actual, you know, people.

Some of these users also aren't developers but just need access to the bug tracker. Some of them are outside contractors for whom multiple companies are now paying the github tax.

But sure. $1.3K isn't much, but it's 5x more than what we had to pay previously and it's being sold as an improvement.

It also means that I have to be much more mindful what other bot-accounts I'm going to add to the organisation. Plus now that github has increased the prices by 5x, who's to say they don't do it again at a late time?

I don't have a problem with moderate price increases. But 5x is too much.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#255

Post by wbillingsley »

moby wrote: post #112
bufordsharkley wrote: post #80

Have been using Github for a community radio station, have been encouraging all staffers to use github accounts to file issues against our private repos, etc. The friendly policies for many collaborators have made this attractive, even though most users have rarely interacted with the repos, if at all. Now each user for the private repo has a significant cost (pretty significant for a non-profit community radio stati…

Certainly appreciate your question around pricing for non-profits here - have you applied for non-profit status through GitHub? We do have discounts to support eligible non-profit organizations, and you can request the discount at https://github.com/nonprofit . Feel free to reach out to Support ( https://github.com/c ) if you have any further questions around this!

Out of interest, why do you require charities to have no religious affiliation at all? Perhaps there's some US tax or legal aspect to it?

At at first glance from overseas, it seems oddly churlish and monoculturalist (dare I say "fearful of the prayerful") to disallow community groups and charities where actually yes their beliefs did prompt them to step out in service, and they are not ashamed of that.

I can't imagine it's a big part of your revenue base, and I wonder if there's more people like me who casually read it and quietly think "ooh, that's a bit inward-looking and snarky -- and goodness they put it on the page twice to make sure" than groups who are actually affected by it.

Suddenly those cheery octocats under "We love people who are changing the world" seem just that bit more limited and exclusionary. If I was in a satirical and provocative mood, I might ask, are they holding hands in togetherness, or to keep the undesirables out?

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#256

Post by odonnellryan »

smackfu wrote: post #251
odonnellryan wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Doesn't say they are employees.

So it's an open source project?

I guess it can be a NFP that has closed-source repos. But why?

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#257

Post by Xylakant »

wlll wrote: post #230
hunvreus wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Lots of collaboraters does not translate to lots of requests. I'd be totally fine being charged by size of data, number of requests,... Number of people that I allow to view my code is a very bad metric for me, especially given that most of those people are already part of a paid account.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#258

Post by heartbreak »

pilif wrote: post #254
heartbreak wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll assume that none of your 15 users are software developers and that none of your users live in a first world country. I'll assume you pay a user $15,000 USD per year in salary. $225,000 for all 15 total. Cost of Github: $1,380. New operating costs: $226,380. I see that they have gone up by %0.6. Crushing.

Some of these users are used for various error-reporting tools to report issues as. I'm not paying these any salary, nor are they actual, you know, people. Some of these users also aren't developers but just need access to the bug tracker. Some of them are outside contractors for whom multiple companies are now paying the github tax. But sure. $1.3K isn't much, but it's 5x more than what we had to pay previously and…

$1,380 is so small an amount that when I worked at BigCorp I could expense that and more each month without approval. No one cares about a thousand bucks.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#259

Post by unfunco »

thijsc wrote: post #208
hunvreus wrote: post #130

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…

For us as a small team it's a very positive change. Our monthly bill just went from $100 to $25.

And for us it's negative, our monthly bill has just increased by hundreds of dollars. In theory, our respective organisations could be in competition, and GitHub has just increased our monthly bill to subsidise your organisation, instead of shouldering the financial burden themselves.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#260

Post by heartbreak »

tanepiper wrote: post #180

There is an element of "double dipping" here that I see as a problem. I already pay $7 a month for my own personal Github account, and for me personally it's nice to have no limit. But if we switch to the new model at work then not only am I paying my $7, but my company will have to pay an additional $9p/m for me to have access to the repos I use daily for work. Even if they removed me from the organisation and added…

Does your ISP double dip if they charge your employer for business internet access and you for home internet access?
Post reply on HN