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

341–350 of 389 posts

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#341

Post by calabin »

flunhat wrote: post #93
jackfoxy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure speculation, it would not surprise me to wake up someday and see MS has bought Stackoverflow. Given their direction of integrating the entire developer experience, it would make sense. MS is upgrading technical docs across the board, organizing and linking to SO content would make sense.

In light of StackOverflow looking for a new CEO, layoffs in the past year and a half, $68 million in venture capital looking for a return, and Joel Spolsky's connections to Microsoft, this might actually happen. I've also gotten the impression that StackOverflow's recruiting product isn't doing so well. It seems to be a few hundred dollars a month for a single job posting, but the results for recruiters are apparentl…

If I remember correctly, my team of four was quoted at $13k/yr for the StackOverflow job posting / recruiting solution.

It's probably worth it for companies with greater hiring needs than ours, but LinkedIn (begrudgingly), and ZipRecruiter have provided enough quality candidate-flow for far less money that it doesn't make any sense for our uses.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#342

Post by paulddraper »

yawaramin wrote: post #151
IceSentry wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because Microsoft has a lot of money doesn't mean they can just throw it around. That's not how the world works...

They're literally throwing around money creating new coding tools, languages, buying GitHub, LinkedIn, ... if we were to debate the effectiveness of its spending, there would be a lot to talk about.

For an ROI.

   while True:
       print 'Developers'
If you can convince them that throwing a few bucks towards something adds to the ROI, then sure.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#343

Post by yawaramin »

johannes1234321 wrote: post #264
yawaramin wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're literally throwing around money creating new coding tools, languages, buying GitHub, LinkedIn, ... if we were to debate the effectiveness of its spending, there would be a lot to talk about.

That has long term effects of tying developers to the brand. Giving money to sonatype or somebody like that will be forgotten in a week by outsiders.

> That has long term effects of tying developers to the brand.

So does GitHub's package registry. In terms of ROI for dollars spent, that seems pretty good.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#344

Post by mceachen »

YorickPeterse wrote: post #75
mceachen wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gitlab's CI pipelines look an awful lot like github's new Actions tab.

I think you mean the other way around, as GitLab CI has been around for years.

Oops. You're correct.

FWIW I'm using GitLab CI for the cross-platform build pipeline of PhotoStructure (8 jobs over 3 OSes), and it's really great.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#345

Post by dethac »

diggan wrote: post #331
bengale wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is somewhat mitigated with Microsoft these days because of their motivations for buying GitHub. For them this endeavour seems to be focused on winning developers hearts and minds rather than seeing how much profit they can make from it. Clearly they have a business case for this, but it seems more to be more geared towards making azure more and more profitable instead.

I'm not as sure as you are. Sure, as it seems today, Microsoft wants developers to be as happy as possible. But in the end, Microsoft is not running a non-profit. They are running a for-profit company and the motive is simple: earn a profit. Today, they can afford not earning as much on their new Package Manager as they earn money elsewhere. But that's no guarantee they will act the same way tomorrow. We've seen Micr…

I think it's good to be cautiously optimistic. Microsoft has a massive revenue source in Azure, and losing 100 million on Github to make 1 billion in Azure is... a no brainer.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#346

Post by diggan »

dethac wrote: post #345
diggan wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not as sure as you are. Sure, as it seems today, Microsoft wants developers to be as happy as possible. But in the end, Microsoft is not running a non-profit. They are running a for-profit company and the motive is simple: earn a profit. Today, they can afford not earning as much on their new Package Manager as they earn money elsewhere. But that's no guarantee they will act the same way tomorrow. We've seen Micr…

I think it's good to be cautiously optimistic. Microsoft has a massive revenue source in Azure, and losing 100 million on Github to make 1 billion in Azure is... a no brainer.

No brainer for who? Feels like the users are the ones loosing here.

If a company is running two divisions, one that doesn't make any profit and another where they make a massive profit, which one will they focus on? If shit hits the fan, which one gets cut first?

Having some core infrastructure like a package registry be the loosing option in that case, does not feel like a no brainer when you're a user choosing a service.

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#347

Post by bbx »

diggan wrote: post #283

It's a really nice project overall, having a registry that supports many different projects and run by a company that today is good, is always nice. But we been here before. We trusted npm and now they are trying to squeeze out a profit, and it ruins it for the users. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but every for-profit company that runs a package registry, eventually stagnates, and ends up implementing things that are…

Great project! And thanks for using Bulma ;-)

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#349

Post by diggan »

bbx wrote: post #347
diggan wrote: post #283

It's a really nice project overall, having a registry that supports many different projects and run by a company that today is good, is always nice. But we been here before. We trusted npm and now they are trying to squeeze out a profit, and it ruins it for the users. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but every for-profit company that runs a package registry, eventually stagnates, and ends up implementing things that are…

Great project! And thanks for using Bulma ;-)

Wonderful to see you here! Thank YOU for Bulma, struggled to find something more lightweight and simple to use. It's simply the best :)

Re: GitHub Package Registry

#350

Post by edem »

ccleve wrote: post #31

This is really outstanding. It will mean the death of Maven Central, about which I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, Sonatype deserves enormous thanks for what they have done for the open source world, as does mvnrepository.org. Their central repository has been free and maintained for a long time. Thank you, Sonatype. On the other hand, it took me three days to release a new version of one of my artifacts the ot…

What? Maven Central is here to stay. It will be here even after a nuclear war. Jitpack does the same as GitHub Package Repository (or even simpler) and Maven Central is still here. I don't see why this would change anything.
Post reply on HN