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

Bidding farewell to Google Code

google-opensource.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–428 of 428 posts

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#421

Post by frik »

innocenat wrote: post #402
frik wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wired article tries to rewrite the history: > rather geeky and sometimes unreliable internet site called SourceForge Wtf. SourceForge was for a long time very decent. It wasn't geeky nor unreliable, it offered CVS and later Subversion, web hosting, mailing list hosting, forums and downloads. GoogleCode itself was geeky with its very basic "Wiki", but it had a leaner "GMail style" UI, with only basic features so…

I haven't read the source article, but SourceForge at some point was real slow. Like, it would takes minutes alone to Log In at SourceForge, let alone checking out SVN repo. Accessing website hosted on SourgeForge was real slow too. I think during that year (not sure which year), tons of projects migrate either to Google Code or to GitHub. It was later that sourceforge improve.

Sourceforge was really good and as big in the open source world (between 1999 and 2006) like Github today. Later Google Code took over a larger part but never become as popular as Sourceforge or Github. Sourceforge is still used by many open source projects as download hosting provider (binary files). Google Code already stopped the download functionality several months/years(?) ago. Google Code was a 20% project created by Google devs in their 20% free-project-time, though it never improved beyond its first MVP stage, but was for many years very successful nevertheless.

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#422

Post by SSLy »

blakeyrat wrote: post #406
SSLy wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would git-annex (avaiable on gitlab.com) together with vcsh and mod-organizer cover you?

I can BARELY figure out how to work Git itself, I'm guessing combining it with 3 other systems is not going to be a good idea.

I've just remembered that github does offer access to its repositories via the svn protocol. what aobut that?

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#423

Post by leni536 »

dchichkov wrote: post #332
NeutronBoy wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Example. A cancer researcher, publishes a paper in Nature Genetics. Like this one: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v42/n3/abs/ng.522.html 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/

Handling and archiving supplementary materials should be the responsibility of the journal (like distributing and archiving the article itself). They should discourage linking to 3rd party websites where the author published his/her work.

I'm pretty sure that Google Code had a TOS where they stated that they don't guarantee that your repository is safe there forever.

There could be several reasons for closing a repository including Google going bankrupt. The availability of a scientific article should be much longer (ideally infinity) than the lifetime of any company.

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#424

Post by duskwuff »

mintplant wrote: post #232
ctb_mg wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the criteria for "legitimate"? A project useful for me may not be "notable" enough for most to consider "legitimate".

Presumably, not abusing Google Code as a hosting site for pirated content.

Or for personal data. I've seen some people using Google Code as a pseudo-Dropbox. Clever, but ultimately not what the service was intended for.

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#425

Post by code_duck »

makomk wrote: post #368
krapp wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in the intervening years, no one running a news server thought to back theirs up, no one crawled Google and made torrents? This is software, not ancient manuscripts written by scribes on now crumbling vellum - there is no excuse for there to be one canonical copy of anything . Every pornographic movie ever made has multiple redundant backups on decentralized peer to peer networks and darknets. I understand the im…

Why would they run their own Usenet archive? Google had the Usenet archiving business sewn up, and by the time they started showing signs of being untrustworthy it was too late and much of the 80s and early 90s stuff only exists in their archives. (Oh, and as a side note apparently a lot of the interesting porn from that era has been lost to history too.)

Porn is never lost... Only siloed. Some old guy in Missouri has ALL of that.

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#426

Post by abraham »

rogerbinns wrote: post #412
z1mm32m4n wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Github for example only lets you have one source repository per project, and as a result the wikis and issues are useless since they are almost always filed against the wrong sub-project. You can disable the wiki and issues pages on a repository-by-repository basis. If you're looking to solve the issue of issues being filed in the wrong place, you could try to pick the component that is the most central or most fro…

This doesn't help for the issues. With commit messages you can reference or close tickets (eg "fixes #73"), but that won't be available if committing, unless in the one repo that does have issues enabled.

You can reference issues in any repo with "ref username/repo#73"

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#427

Post by DaveWalk »

dchichkov wrote: post #332
NeutronBoy wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Example. A cancer researcher, publishes a paper in Nature Genetics. Like this one: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v42/n3/abs/ng.522.html 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/

Great example. In 2-10 years from now, someone will want to find that repository.

Does anyone know of an effort to maintain this, like is done with sequencing data at the NIH? Something like PubMed Central?

I have first hand experience with this on the biology side, looking for reagents or even protocols from a 10 year old paper...and coming up completely dry. It's kind of a travesty, but the world collectively shrugged.

Re: Bidding farewell to Google Code

#428

Post by ajessup »

dudus wrote: post #319
ajessup wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PM on App Engine here. We'll continue to be using (and monitoring) the Google Code issue tracker until we have a robust alternative available. We have plans for this, we're just not ready to talk about them yet.

Is this a plan just for AppEngine or for all other Google Products that use Code as an external Issue Tracker?

Not sure about other products
Post reply on HN