331–340 of 428 posts
This is not the right way to bid goodbye to a lot of open source code that will disappear from the world forever.
Perhaps Google could partner with Internet Archive to preserve this history before it is lost forever?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shutting down Google Code is equivalent to destroying a storage full of handwritten articles, some of which exist only in a single copy and some of which are incredibly valuable. Why valuable? For example computer science researchers had been using Google Code to host supplement code for their research publications for years now. These repositories are not maintained by these researchers any more, yet the code some t…
If the code is that valuable, then perhaps they should put some time into maintaining the code, moving it to another provider, or convincing somebody to pay for hosting.
In that paper she publishes a link to a Google Code repository as supplement materials. For example, in the aforementioned paper there is a link to the following repository: http://code.google.com/p/glu-genetics/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I migrated all my projects to Bitbucket when GitHub decided they do not want to host release downloads (they reversed the decision after that). I also use other Atlassian products and I trust the company to maintain the product, much more than I trust GitHub. Bitbucket has much better review tools - hierarchical comments, approve button, side-by-side diff (GitHub has added that recently). You can see commit log as a…
GitHub decided they do not want to host release downloads (they reversed the decision after that) AFAICT they haven't, at least i don't see any way to upload release tarballs. they certainly let anybody download tarballs generated for any annotated tag. but those tarballs are not immutable! once in a while, these tarballs start coming down with different hashes, presumably as github changes the code which generates t…
Ugh. No, not that Google Code is shutting down, per se. The alternatives are better and for active projects there is plenty of time to migrate. What I object to is that the site will only be preserved in read-only mode for 5 months, despite its popularity and the resulting large number of deep links into it on the Web. Why not forever? git, hg, and I believe svn can all provide read-only access (with some bandwidth o…
I think Google and others should feel free to experiment, shut down closed experiments once the time is right, and not have to be obligated to spend resources on archiving things. As long as migrating is easy.
The article gives the impression that they were combating some sort of systemic (malicious?) abuse. I don't doubt the statement, but I'm having trouble picturing exactly what they're going through. What kind of abuse do project hosting providers face on a recurring basis?
Hi everyone. I wanted to let you know (and I know this isn't a huge surprise) that we will be shutting down the Google Code project hosting system over the next year. Wired did a nice story about Github that touches on the shutdown: http://www.wired.com/2015/03/github-conquered-google-microso... I'll be hanging around answering questions, but the short form of 'why' is that it just isn't used much anymore, ourselves…
Are there any alternatives that allow the use of SVN? I use Google Code to store my Skyrim mods-- because Skyrim mods heavily depend on being in the Skyrim folder structure, I need to have them on SVN (or TFS, I guess) so I can create "sparse" repos. Git doesn't allow this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google hates anything that requires a human's touch, and per the article: > Lately, the administrative load has consisted almost exclusively of abuse management. They see Google Code as a time-sink, and they're probably right, and it's not surprising to me that they'd drop something that is no longer serving it's intended purpose, but instead has negative implications for their model. Keeping it going forward would r…
> I work on Google Code, and we will be putting a service in place to redirect deep links to project homepages, issues, etc. to their new locations. And this is an opt in service, nothing is automated. They could ,AT LEAST, partner with Github or someone else to have the whole thing automated... Seriously... the really want to put 0 money in that stuff,they don't give a damn. There are seriously good projects that wi…
Oh come on! I'm not a fan of everything Google does, and I can see, and in part agree with, the point you are trying to make, but this is just grasping at straws. You just lost all credibility with this comment.
Yes, I can see unmaintained code being lost here, and that is unfortunate. But Google provided this service for free, a service they started to promote open source software development. They noticed that there was a big move to other hosting platforms, that they themselves also believe are better than theirs. This has led to support for this platform to be little more than dealing with abuse cases, and they feel that the benefit to the community no longer outweighs the cost of the platform.
They have gone out of their way to provide ways to migrate code from Google Code to these other "better" platforms, and they are giving people over 18 months to migrate their code:
> January 25, 2016 - The project hosting service is closed. You will be able to download a tarball of project source, issues, and wikis. These tarballs will be available throughout the rest of 2016.
They really didn't have to provide any of this.
None of this is "evil". There are plenty of acts that Google do that border on "evil", but this is really just the wrong one to choose to call them out on.
What do you really expect them to do here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the great feedback! I've changed the homepage according to your feedback in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/commit/3a09175f... https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ mentions that it runs the enterprise edition in the middle box The pricing page is a hard one, we'll look into that. Any idea how we can make the three blurbs on the homepage feel more like different products?
This is a HUGE improvement :D
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a rather watery definition of evil. It is fairly close to saying a restaurant is evil for not keeping a menu item you like.
> It is fairly close to saying a restaurant is evil for not keeping a menu item you like. Actually closer to saying they are evil for destroying humanity's only copy of the recipe.