honestly want a non-vscode plugin for copilot.
There are plugins for VSCode, VS, everything JetBrains and Neovim. What else could you want?
GitHub-Next
31–40 of 119 posts
Re: GitHub-Next
#32[deleted]
Re: GitHub-Next
#33If anyone on the team at GitHub who built this site sees this -- Heads up, that page has no ` ` tag so the browser tab is `githubnext.com/`. That is a _VERY_ minor nit, but still an SEO ding (you're github, that doesn't matter much), and a rough edge that could be buffed out. Bonus points for adding a favicon too. :)
> That is a _VERY_ minor nit
Well, the title is precisely the only mandatory element in a valid HTML5 document, even if forgetting it seems harmless.
Re: GitHub-Next
#34If anyone on the team at GitHub who built this site sees this -- Heads up, that page has no ` ` tag so the browser tab is `githubnext.com/`. That is a _VERY_ minor nit, but still an SEO ding (you're github, that doesn't matter much), and a rough edge that could be buffed out. Bonus points for adding a favicon too. :)
> That is a _VERY_ minor nit Well, the title is precisely the only mandatory element in a valid HTML5 document, even if forgetting it seems harmless.
Long time ago I read/skimmed the specification, but I think the DOCTYPE preamble is the only _required_ element in a HTML5 document. The specification allows you to omit if it's empty, and if that's allowed, then it should be allowed to not having any elements as well.
Edit with details from https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/document-metad...
> Note: The title element is a required child in most situations, but when a higher-level protocol provides title information, e.g. in the Subject line of an e-mail when HTML is used as an e-mail authoring format, the title element can be omitted.
From https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/document-metad...
> If it's reasonable for the Document to have no title, then the title element is probably not required. See the head element's content model for a description of when the element is required.
So strictly speaking, if it's meant to be used as a traditional web page, you should really have it (obviously), but it's not strictly required.
Re: GitHub-Next
#35Did GitHub ever respond to the concerns about CoPilot? Specifically whether they trained it on private repos or GPL?
copilot is just a prototype. imagine in 10-20 years, software engineers as we know it will be obsolete.
I remember when this was said about visual-programming. That didn't exactly pan out
Re: GitHub-Next
#36> GitHub Next investigates the future of software development.
Yesterday I tried to use Datadog's Github integration for stacktraces and it asked me for "access Github on my behalf".
It's been the same since the beginning of Github - they leave integrators with no better options, and users with an ambiguous UI dialog / docs that downplay the scope being granted.
Sooooo maybe fix your own stuff before making such grandiose claims?
Re: GitHub-Next
#37Did GitHub ever respond to the concerns about CoPilot? Specifically whether they trained it on private repos or GPL?
copilot is just a prototype. imagine in 10-20 years, software engineers as we know it will be obsolete.
imagine in 10-20 years, software engineers as we know it will be obsolete.
I've heard people saying this since the mid-70's.
I lump it into the same trash bin with flying cars and orbiting space hotels, and "90 minutes from New York to Paris — undersea by rail." Things envisioned by artists that will never happen in my lifetime, or yours.
Re: GitHub-Next
#38If anyone on the team at GitHub who built this site sees this -- Heads up, that page has no ` ` tag so the browser tab is `githubnext.com/`. That is a _VERY_ minor nit, but still an SEO ding (you're github, that doesn't matter much), and a rough edge that could be buffed out. Bonus points for adding a favicon too. :)
It's also horribly bloated. Just scrolling on my modern Android smartphone makes it lag and drop to like 5 FPS.
Re: GitHub-Next
#39Visualising a Codebase: This sounds very interesting, it looks like similar graphics as what CodeScene creates.
The dependency between the modules seems like a nice addition to me. I don't think CodeScene has that one. Can't wait to try this on our bigger projects.
I never found a really good way to visualize large codebases and the dependencies between the modules, does somebody have something for this?
Re: GitHub-Next
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those things were ultimately ruled as fair use though which is what Microsoft is claiming here as well.
Those things were fair use, what Microsoft is doing is copyright violation pure and simple.
If Copilot reads copyrighted code to learn, and it‘s copyright violation…
Does the same apply to a human? Do we now define copyright violation differently for computers? I don‘t know the perfect answer here. But I‘m not so sure we should have standards that change depending on if a program is doing it or a human is doing it. Perhaps a bad standard to begin with.
I do tend to learn towards thinking „company uses publicly available, open source code in product“ is somewhat of a nothing-burger though.