41–50 of 146 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty easy to game this. Just keep creating repos till you hit # one billion and remove the old ones. Their API makes it trivial. The only issue will be rate limits, and other people simultaneously creating repos, so it's a matter of luck.
There was a guy who got fired from Meta for creating excessive automated diffs in pursuit of a certain magic number
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty easy to game this. Just keep creating repos till you hit # one billion and remove the old ones. Their API makes it trivial. The only issue will be rate limits, and other people simultaneously creating repos, so it's a matter of luck.
I don't believe they will renumber the old ones. Also, it can't be trivial, since two people can try this, and only one can win.
On a serious note, I'm a bit surprised that GitHub makes it trivial to compute the rate at which new repositories are created. Isn't that kind of information usually a corporate secret?
Is there any reason for GitHub to hide this information though? How could it be used against them? (I understand many companies default to not expose any information unless forced otherwise.)
This is either staged, or incredible commentary on most github repos , having no purpose, never being realized, and even having given up dreaming .
When I was a student I had to manually set up CVS pserver and CVSWeb to collaborate with other students on assignments.
This is a bit easier by at least a few orders of magnitude.
In case anyone cares to read more about the OSM milestone, the official blog entry: https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2021/02/25/100-million-edits-... My write-up of changeset activity around the event: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/LucGommans/diary/395954
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any reason for GitHub to hide this information though? How could it be used against them? (I understand many companies default to not expose any information unless forced otherwise.)
The rate of creation is like meh, but being able to enumerate all of the repos might be problematic, following new repos and scanning them for leaked credentials could be a negative... but github may have a feed of new repos anyway? Also, having a sequence implies at least a global lock on that sequence during repo creation. Repo creation could otherwise be a scoped lock. OTOH, it's not necessarily handled that way -…
People do this. GitHub started doing it too so now you get a nice email from them first instead of another kind of surprise.
Awesome! Only a little over a billion more to go before GitHub’s very own OpenAPI Spec can start overflowing int32 on repositories too, just like it already does for workflows run IDs! https://github.com/github/rest-api-description/issues/4511