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

GitHub-Next

githubnext.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 119 posts

Re: GitHub-Next

#41

Post by saurik »

vemv wrote: post #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 gran…

Why wouldn't this be done over git? It seems almost ridiculous for this to be a GitHub-specific API and authentication mechanism instead of merely authorizing an SSH key from Datadog (which would then allow whatever this service is doing with the source code to also work for any other source code hosting solution).

Re: GitHub-Next

#42

Post by justaj »

jayroh wrote: post #16

If 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. :)

Not only that, but it appears their DNS settings are a bit funky as well:

  $ dig githubnext.com
  
  ; > DiG 9.11.3-1ubuntu1.17-Ubuntu > githubnext.com
  ;; global options: +cmd
  ;; Got answer:
  ;; ->>HEADER

Re: GitHub-Next

#43

Post by stby »

jayroh wrote: post #16

If 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. :)

Favicon is there, it just happens to be light grey. I guess someone only tested this one on a browser in dark mode.

Re: GitHub-Next

#44

Post by debugnik »

capableweb wrote: post #34
debugnik wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 situation…

From the head element section mentioned:

> If the document is an iframe srcdoc document or if title information is available from a higher-level protocol: Zero or more elements of metadata content, of which no more than one is a title element […].

> Otherwise: One or more elements of metadata content, of which exactly one is a title element […].

So it is required, not just suggested, for a web page, but not for all kinds of html documents; TIL. The parser still tries to parse head contents before body contents even if you omit the head tags, so a doctype followed by title is the shortest valid full page.

I didn't mention the doctype because I believe it isn't strictly speaking an element, just a preamble, but you're right, it's required as well.

Re: GitHub-Next

#45

Post by chrismorgan »

capableweb wrote: post #34
debugnik wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 situation…

It’s not that you’re allowed to omit the head element (you’re not, and you can’t), but that its start and end tags are optional. Same with the html and body elements. (These remarks apply to HTML syntax only; in XML syntax, which is certainly still a thing, you can (if you care not for validity) omit whatever elements you choose to, only needing some root element.)

As far as sources are concerned, the HTML spec is maintained by WHATWG, not W3C. The relevant citations start at https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#docume....

The normative reference on the necessity of is in the content model for the head element:

> If the document is an `iframe srcdoc` document or if title information is available from a higher-level protocol: Zero or more elements of metadata content, of which no more than one is a `title` element and no more than one is a `base` element.

> Otherwise: One or more elements of metadata content, of which exactly one is a `title` element and no more than one is a `base` element.

For the rest, you’re correct: the DOCTYPE is the only always-mandatory thing in a valid HTML document.

Re: GitHub-Next

#46

Post by chrismorgan »

debugnik wrote: post #44
capableweb wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 situation…

From the head element section mentioned: > If the document is an iframe srcdoc document or if title information is available from a higher-level protocol: Zero or more elements of metadata content, of which no more than one is a title element […]. > Otherwise: One or more elements of metadata content, of which exactly one is a title element […]. So it is required, not just suggested, for a web page, but not for all k…

> I didn't mention the doctype because I believe it isn't strictly speaking an element, just a preamble, but you're right, it's required as well.

Funny thing, when I read “the only mandatory element in a valid HTML5 document”, I interpreted “element” in its generic English sense (piece, thing) rather than its HTML sense (node of type element, as distinct from text/comment/doctype/other-types-only-found-in-XML-syntax nodes).

Re: GitHub-Next

#47

Post by cmeacham98 »

cush wrote: post #26
hbn wrote: post #7

Could they use the blurb of text at the top to give me like... a noun to describe what this is? It just says some vagueness about the future and investigating and exploring. Is it a conference? A team? An initiative? How does it work? Whatever this is supposed to be selling me on, they're doing a terrible job because I can't figure out what it is!

Did they add this in the last 40 mins? I'm seeing a pretty good description: " GitHub Next investigates the future of software development. We explore things beyond the adjacent possible. Tools and technologies that will change our craft. New approaches to building healthy, productive software engineering teams. "

That explains what it does (somewhat vaguely), but not what Github Next is and who makes it up. Is it a team at GitHub that employees work on full time? It it some kind of initiative where GitHub employees spend part of their time working on it? Is it a community effort? Am I able to join in?

Re: GitHub-Next

#48

Post by jacquesm »

voxic11 wrote: post #30
jacquesm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those things were fair use, what Microsoft is doing is copyright violation pure and simple.

Maybe, but then every large AI project is also committing copyright violations because as Microsoft notes this is currently a common practice in the AI research community.

Other parties doing is no excuse imo.

Microsoft has been super litigious in the past when it came to copyright violation starting all the way back with Bill Gates' letter in Byte magazine about those pesky pirates. To see them do this makes pirating MS software fair game from here on. They could have asked nicely, instead they just took.

Re: GitHub-Next

#50

Post by idan »

jayroh wrote: post #16

If 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. :)

Hey! Thanks for the report, we're on it :D
Post reply on HN