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

Introducing unlimited private repositories

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 662 posts

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#441

Post by sosuke »

partiallypro wrote: post #376
hunvreus wrote: post #130

1. Take a gazillion dollars in funding on an over-hyped valuation, 2. Go through significant organizational changes that end up with the departure of a co-founder (and more suits in the building). 3. Notice that a significant segment of your growth (VC-funded startups) are running out of money. 4. Switch to a user-based pricing to generate more revenue for investors, but spin it as a freebie "Hey! Look at the cool un…

I use GitHub for my public repos, but use Visual Studio Online (poorly named, since it is not actually Visual Studio) for my private ones (also unlimited, but free.) I know a lot of others that use Bitbucket, etc because of GitHub's pricing. I feel like GitHub would make more sense to smaller devs, like myself, if it were bundled with other services. Like, if they partnered with Microsoft, Google & Amazon and offered…

I just looked it up again, they changed the name to Visual Studio Team Services which makes much more sense.

https://www.visualstudio.com/products/visual-studio-team-ser...

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#442

Post by rdancer »

This is an awful pricing model.

⇒ One-size-fits-all never fits all. Getting rid of tiers is naïve and misguided. Even if just for anchoring and the illusion of choice in face of terrible choices, tiers are a necessity. Sales will suffer, customer satisfaction will suffer.

⇒ I don't care if existing private customers pay the same or less. The price points should have been retained, and customers let to switch to a lower tier if they wished. Capturing consumer surplus leads to increased revenue. Github needs that money; the more money they throw away foolishly, the closer they are to bankruptcy.

⇒ "Starting today"?! At least current developer plans have been grandfathered in, with a 12-month notice period. Still, if an org has been in the process of planning a move to Github, they will have to re-evaluate.

Github has been such a great platform. A major stumble like this, I'm worried they may not be with us for much longer.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#443

Post by driverdan »

sandGorgon wrote: post #154
teen wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitbucket is terrible though, so what does it matter?

Bitbucket is awesome. Their bug tracker is much better... plus Hipchat for free! Do you seriously spend money on Slack ;)

Slack hasn't had the downtime issues HipChat has had this year.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#444

Post by StevePerkins »

TL;DR - GitHub is switching to Bitbucket's pricing model, but with a monthly charge of $9/user rather than $1/user.

Seems bizarre to me. The "enterprise" market they're chasing are largely Atlassian customers already, and Bitbucket has a competitive edge there with its JIRA integration. GitHub's distinguishing characteristic was a different pricing model, that for some organizations makes more sense than Atlassian's does.

If they start competing apples-to-apples, but at 9x the cost, why would any enterprise use GitHub unless they have a hipster CIO/CTO who just thinks it's a "cooler" brand?

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#445

Post by sytse »

ciokan wrote: post #429
sytse wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wanted to add that if you don't want to run GitLab yourself our GitLab.com is free with unlimited private repositories but it also has also unlimited private collaborators https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/

Any API on this service?

Sure, see http://doc.gitlab.com/ce/api/

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#446

Post by brianwawok »

z3t4 wrote: post #406
lox wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pricing is a function of what people will pay for it, not what it costs to make. Consider Slack as a fine example.

I read an article not long ago that Github had to spin up three physical machines, just to handle one customer. Although it was an extreme example. Compared to slack, who could probably have a million users one a single machine, making it almost zero marginal cost per new user. While a user for Github means buying more hardware and a notable marginal cost. If you for example are a reseller of commodity goods, you can…

You realize Slack does full searching on your chat + your attached google drive? I would not be surprised for some big Enterprise customers to have 100GB of total data indexed.

Not saying the price is related to the cost, but I am not sure about the no marginal cost part.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#447

Post by puddintane »

sytse wrote: post #402
fps wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have about 100 private repos at the moment, including internal tools, branding related components, infrastructure code and pre-release stuff that we're not developing in the open. We may just move those to AWS code commit, gitlab or gogs and switch back to a free org.

You're very welcome to switch to GitLab.com, we are free forever https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/#why-gitlab-com-will-be-... and it can import directly from GitHub.

GitLab CE (Community Edition is Free) and is truly great we use it in our own internal software development process.

However for a bigger enterprise they require more functionality here is a comparison of the differences between the Community and Enterprise Editions.

https://about.gitlab.com/features/#compare

Several pricing options for EE but essentially the base cost is $39 /year per user.

https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#448

Post by rdancer »

giovannibajo1 wrote: post #63
arnvald wrote: post #40

A small comparison: Team | Cost Before | Cost Now 1 repo, 5 users | $25 | $25 1 repo, 10 users | $25 | $70 11 repos, 5 users | $50 | $25 11 repos, 10 users | $50 | $70 5 repos, 50 users | $25 | $430 50 repos, 5 users | $100 | $25 50 repos, 50 users | $100 | $430 I'm not sure how common are organizations with few users and large number of repose - I guess software houses that keep old projects (for maintenance and fut…

Even for software houses, it's VERY problematic as we add customers to projects as external collaborators and we're going to get billed for that forever, even if most customers have very light usage, and even for non active projects. I was thrilled by this news but it's going to be completely unaffordable for us. We have 29 users and 51 external collaborators. We have recently upgraded to the Platinum plan ($2460/yr)…

At those price points you don't have a sales rep and individual pricing?

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#449

Post by vehementi »

unfunco wrote: post #382
odonnellryan wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> GitHub has just increased our monthly bill to subsidise your organisation, instead of shouldering the financial burden themselves. This is a really weird argument. They are a company supplying a service, why should they ever have to shoulder the bill? I'd argue that if things stayed the same, this small company would subsidize you: if you have 100 accounts using 1 repo it's more likely you're using more resources t…

My point is that larger companies are now be punished for a failed initial pricing model by GitHub. I prefer the new pricing model from a personal point of view, but for larger organisations it's now too expensive and I think many will relocate their repositories to BitBucket, or GitLab, or Gogs, or etcetera. Edit: My parent post is being down voted and that's fine, my point was not made in anger, it was an observati…

> punished

> subsidized

Come on. Those things are not happening.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#450

Post by sdm »

beberlei wrote: post #336

The incentive changes for this are so massive, nice "experiment" from an economics perspective. 1. penalizes OpenSource organizations that need a few private repos for password, server configuration or other things. Was 25$ before, now for example Doctrine with 48 collaborators it would be 394$. Even if just the admins have access to that repository. 2. penalizes collaboration, inviting every non-technical person in…

Yup, #2 would hits us very hard. We have just over 40 people split between two organizations; everyone has access to Github and all have been trained to use it. Only about half are developers; are a lot of rules in a simple DSL that business analysts maintain and designer need to be able to update art and that's not even counting the bots. We have about as many Github users as repos -- we archive anything that's out of date to long term storage. If we are forced to switch to the new pricing model Github will likely lose us as a customer. The new model is just insanely expensive. The main reason we choose Github was the ability to have everyone use it. Feels like an outright cash grab honestly, especially with #4.
Post reply on HN