Live data from Hacker News

GitHub and the crime against software

eblog.fly.dev

41–50 of 124 posts

Re: GitHub and the crime against software

#41
post #10

What happened to hacker culture? Did everyone (or enough) just sell out? It’s fascinating to me that the people who know the most about tech keep deciding over and over to give something to some corporation and inevitably it becomes an issue. I guess ease of use and freemium really trumps everything; I expect more from smart people but money talks.

I saw a thumbnail on Youtube that said "GitHub is killing open source" and I think the sheer wrongness of the statement surmises the entire idea very well.

There are many things that I don't like about Github, but I think the most important one is that Github doesn't allow users to have multiple free accounts.

You can create as many accounts as you want on Reddit, have as many blogs as you want on Tumblr, and even create multiple personae on Facebook on a single account, but Github doesn't allow you to do any of that.

You can't be a "hacker" platform when you give users less control over their privacy than Facebook provides.

I assume that is a bigger problem when you consider everyone decided to stop hosting their own forum and moving all their discussion to Github issues and Github's built-in forum.

Re: GitHub and the crime against software

#42
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking like "you had 200 GitHub stars before coming to us so we start you with 200 stars" as a migration process. maybe they wouldn't be as reputable but everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not?

> I'm thinking like "you had 200 GitHub stars before coming to us so we start you with 200 stars" as a migration process. maybe they wouldn't be as reputable but everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not? And how will the project accumulate more? > everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not? Then why do they still have purchase value?

Copy the same way people can star projects to the new platform too, but maybe allow people to buy them directly from you to cut out the middleman. It could be very efficient.

Re: GitHub and the crime against software

#45
All this hate directed at github feels odd, every time I look into people complaining, or moving their projects off, other than a few related to genuine bugs, many just seem ideological. This article, calling it a crime against software? ... It's just silly. The article itself is a crime against articles, barely readable, weird ass colors. It mostly seems a regurgitation of other peoples complaints and mostly overblown.

We've been using github for a while at our company and find it really good. Copilot reviews are good, we have actions that work every single time, everything just works really well. There are, of course, plenty of things that could be improved, but it's still top dog in this space. I think maybe a couple of times there's been an outage that's affected us for a small amount of time. Overall, it's a good product.

Re: GitHub and the crime against software

#47
post #5

Because of so many GitHub problems, I'm adding GitLab.com and Codeberg.org. Setup is simply 3 steps: 1. Sign up on each service, ideally with the same username. 2. For each repo you want to share, create the same repo name as a blank repo; do not automatically create a README. 3. Edit your local file .git/config to add push URLs, then push as usual. Example: [remote "origin"] url = git@github.com:foo/bar.git pushurl…

Where do you keep Issues, Pull Requests, Wikis, Discussions, project boards, and everything else? (rhetorical question.) These days, the problem with cloud-hosted Git platforms is not where to push your code. Replicating repositories across multiple providers is relatively easy, and Git has always been good at that. The harder problem is that successful teams end up accumulating a lot more than source code around the…

> Where do you keep Issues, Pull Requests, Wikis, Discussions, project boards, and everything else? (rhetorical question.)

I think it's worthy of a non-rhetorical answer anyways: https://docs.gitlab.com/user/project/import/github/#imported...

None of those might be perfect, but at least people are trying. Even something like Gitea and other forges that you can host yourself have support for most of the basic functionality you'd expect.

However, If we ever wanted a setup where it's easy to mirror rather than import stuff, we'd probably want to look in the direction of storing everything in folders within the repo, e.g. a file/folder for every issue, for every Wiki page etc. Most of the mirroring seems to only concern the repo itself, not the stuff around it, for example: https://docs.gitlab.com/user/project/repository/mirror/

Re: GitHub and the crime against software

#48
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking like "you had 200 GitHub stars before coming to us so we start you with 200 stars" as a migration process. maybe they wouldn't be as reputable but everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not?

> I'm thinking like "you had 200 GitHub stars before coming to us so we start you with 200 stars" as a migration process. maybe they wouldn't be as reputable but everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not? And how will the project accumulate more? > everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not? Then why do they still have purchase value?

> everyone knows it's gamed anyway, so why not?

Arbitrage. Devs know its gamed. VCs less so.

Re: GitHub and the crime against software

#49
post #37

Has anyone switched over to Fossil SCM, so they get issue tracking as part of the repo

I really have wanted to do this but Fossil lacks MFA, OIDC, and of course CI/CD. Maybe there's a way to get all three in it but Idk. I know for OIDC you could in theory just use a reverse proxy to do it but then you have to get Fossil to respect it and not just ask you to login again.
Post reply on HN