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

501–510 of 662 posts

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#501

Post by slantyyz »

VLM wrote: post #343
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.

"that we're not developing in the open" Honest question... why? I totally understand the mindset of "gotta go all secret squirrel to protect our profits" but if your org isn't in it for the profits there's not much to protect? I have seen examples of people performing very naughty acts like private repos to hold plain text passwords, plain text cloud service keys, plain text corporate credit card numbers for expense…

My first job out of university was at a not-for-profit, and it is a surprisingly cut-throat sector.

We had two main competitors in our space, and while the ultimate goal for everyone including our competitors was to do a common good, we were competing for a limited pool of donation dollars.

Because of that, sharing any intellectual property that made us better at what we did (i.e., raise more money, hire more staff, fund more initiatives) could result in a competitor using that same IP to put us out of business.

I get that in the big picture, it's not the way things should be done, but in the small picture, you're usually talking about individuals with their own agendas.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#502

Post by Zypho »

Zypho wrote: post #283

Everyone who is crying right now would be crying more if Github were to make the price free for private repos because with that, the amount of open source libraries they use would be cut in half.

-points but no reasons?

Agreed this will impact some organizations in negative ways such as the non-for-profit orgs. To that Github offers support in this sense here: https://github.com/nonprofit

Like others, without specific data, I would assume this will impact the majority of users on Github for the better and that organizations with many contributors needing access to private repos are the minority. In any pricing structure change, there is always going to be a minority that is impacted negatively. I don't think Github would have made this decision without analytics to back it up.

Another fair point is I think this structure is more appealing to companies who prefer to look at cost-per-employee for something that is an everyday tool rather than cost-of-architecture.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#503

Post by __jal »

VLM wrote: post #343
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.

"that we're not developing in the open" Honest question... why? I totally understand the mindset of "gotta go all secret squirrel to protect our profits" but if your org isn't in it for the profits there's not much to protect? I have seen examples of people performing very naughty acts like private repos to hold plain text passwords, plain text cloud service keys, plain text corporate credit card numbers for expense…

There are a ton of reasons not to develop in the open, no matter what your structure.

- You're experimenting - You don't want comments from the peanut gallery while things are in progress - It is not for external use, specific to an institution or project, or otherwise nobody else will care - It deals with something sensitive - You've made an agreement with someone else that requires it - etc. etc. etc.

People seem to have weird notions about nonprofits. Your tax structure doesn't change the fact that you operate in a world of other human beings.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#504

Post by shepbook »

I think this is a clear win for individual users that have been paying for GitHub. For organizations, I'm curious how many organizations they have just bumped above the $300-500/month mark. A lot of companies allow managers discretionary spending limits that they can spend without requesting approval, and if makes me wonder if they just made a bunch of managers need to start asking for approval for their GitHub bill. Another comment mentioned that having it filter up that the cost of a service just increase several times, will likely result in people being told to investigate alternatives. If that's the case, there are a fair number of alternatives to go to, depending on your specific situation.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#505

Post by stevenbedrick »

stonedge wrote: post #364
WillAbides wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check the bottom of this page [0] and prepare to be thrilled. [0] https://education.github.com/

This is only for the teaching/student aspect of academia. There's the whole business side of academia which is still a non-profit, still doesn't have any money, but for which the academic stuff doesn't apply.

Very well-put.

Furthermore, Github's "Education" site doesn't actually say _what_ the acadmic pricing plans are like, just that you can "ask for a discount".

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#506

Post by manigandham »

It's amazing how cheap people/companies are if they're complaining about these prices.

$9/user/month for one of the best and easy-to-use platforms to store and manage your repos and help your software development, which for most companies is extremely important to their product.

Slack is $8/user/month and yet people have no problem with that pricing. Git is also extremely portable and easy to move and takes minutes to self-host so what's the problem here?

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#507

Post by ShakataGaNai »

biztos wrote: post #247

I find it interesting that so many people here are unhappy with the change. Sure, prices will go up for a lot of organizations, but is $9/worker/month really a lot to pay for all the stuff GitHub offers? At Bay Area prices isn't that about 5 minutes of developer pay per month? For independent use it seems like a very positive change, in fact I'm guessing it's a direct challenge to GitLab. I was considering moving my…

Out of morbid curiosity I switched ones of my orgs over to the new billing scheme. I have 4 users in the org team, and 1 external contributor (a client who has access). I am being billed for 5 seats.

So yes, if you invite external contributors to a single repo (Say a consultant with clients). You will pay for each and every account you invite. Gitlab it is!

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#508

Post by sequoia »

fps wrote: post #269
cstejerean wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per user pricing makes a lot more sense than per repo pricing. This way larger organizations pay more money than smaller ones regardless of how they structure their code. This is a good deal for small organizations that like to have many small repositories (for internal libraries, utilities, micro services, modules, etc). Sure, it screws up a few models that rely on external collaborators to get access to private rep…

I work for a non-profit open source organization that collaborates on github ( https://github.com/edx/ ) We have lots of people who aren't employees, but have signed a contributor agreement with our organization and contribute changes to our software. Our bill will go up from $200/month to over $2000/month with this new pricing. We can afford it (it's still a small fraction of our AWS bill) but it will force us to lo…

> We have lots of people who aren't employees, but have signed a contributor agreement with our organization and contribute changes to our software.

So you have volunteers, working on your proprietary, private software for free. The labor is free & now you're complaining that you'll have to pay a per-free-laborer fee for the infrastructure to manage all these free-laborers? I hope I'm missing something here...

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#509

Post by cortesoft »

biztos wrote: post #247

I find it interesting that so many people here are unhappy with the change. Sure, prices will go up for a lot of organizations, but is $9/worker/month really a lot to pay for all the stuff GitHub offers? At Bay Area prices isn't that about 5 minutes of developer pay per month? For independent use it seems like a very positive change, in fact I'm guessing it's a direct challenge to GitLab. I was considering moving my…

From what I read, as long as you don't mind giving your collaborators full access, you can have as many as you want on your private repo. If you want to grant limited access (say, read but not write), then you have to use an org.

Re: Introducing unlimited private repositories

#510

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

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…

Put me on that list: small business doing lots of very small projects. I just upgraded my gh account to the next tier a few months ago and now it looks like my bill will be going back down.
Post reply on HN