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

GitHub is now free for teams

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 664 posts

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#541

Post by oefrha »

ksec wrote: post #485
masklinn wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still get a Pro option when going to https://github.com/account/upgrade from a free account, and it seems to match Teams, here's the blurb: > Required reviewers in private repos > Protected branches in private repos > Repository insights in private repos > Wikis in private repos > Pages in private repos > Code owners in private repos > 3,000 minutes for GitHub Actions > 2GB of storage for packages

So basically Pro and Team are the same now? Edit: The FAQ points to Github product page [1] which list GitHub Team having 10K Actions instead. [1] https://help.github.com/en/github/getting-started-with-githu...

Now that's just weird, pricing page says 3k for Team.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#542

Post by sytelus »

nrr wrote: post #451
sytelus wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it’s not fair. Banning a repo should be taken as seriously as banning a book. Living in a country that is US where github HQ is hosted, freedom of speech should be prized and cared for dearly. For a commercial company, there should be only one reason to ban a repo and that is to abide with a law. For even that company should do everything in its power to prevent that or provide a viable lawful alternative. This s…

I appreciate the idealism here, but the reality is that trying to run a business under the pretense of free speech absolutism can alienate an otherwise profitable market segment. With the loss of that market segment likely comes the grumbling of investors, to whom ultimately the executive management is beholden. Grumbly investors beget grumbly board members, who then vote to oust executives to correct the profitabili…

You making the argument that to make some religious customers/investors happy, it's ok to mistreat LGBTs. After all, they are such minority segment and, you know, we are all here just for shareholder wealth maximization.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#543

Post by hunter2_ »

Saaster wrote: post #193
derefr wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like SAML needs the same "everyone gets together to make a FOSS implementation that knows about the weird quirks of all the implementations it interacts with" approach that e.g. the Samba project was founded upon.

I agree. There's a million SAML for Java/Python/Node.js/Foo libraries out there, all with a long list of issues and known cases that don't work correctly, security issues etc. but it's the wrong model in my opinion. Instead of directly bolting SAML into your app, I think a FOSS implementation of an independently running service is the way to go. You run the battle tested open source service (locally / in your cloud),…

This sounds like Shibboleth. The SP bolts onto httpd and delivers things like user attributes as server variables that apps can simply read. It even works if httpd is a reverse proxy in front of nodejs or whatever else, since you protect the app using location directives which play nice with proxypass directives.

The opposite certainly exists though, for example simplesamlphp which gets commingled into a php app codebase as you described.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#545

Post by FpUser »

endgame wrote: post #489
FpUser wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly what I do. I use self hosted solutions for my source code repositories. I just can't digest my code being handled by some other entity. Too important.

Amazing that you got downvoted for this. I pay for code hosting precisely because I want to see an ecosystem of code hosts, and monocultures are dangerous.

Well I've never downvoted a single post no matter how much I disliked it. Personally I consider this a kind of weakness and the whole system as promoting herd mentality. But whatever floats their boat.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#546

Post by yellowapple »

pc86 wrote: post #322
renata wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, it sounds like the letter needs to be fixed. It's not fair to expect people to follow an ephemeral ideal of what the rules are rather than what they're told the rules actually are.

Like I said, it's not always that simple. When it's not, something less than 100% transparency allows one to look at the given particulars of a case and determine whether or not someone is simply trying to evade the spirit of a rule or not. It gives enforcement actors a little lee-way that they wouldn't otherwise have.

> It gives enforcement actors a little lee-way that they wouldn't otherwise have.

Which can be and often is subject to abuse.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#547

Post by vertis »

natfriedman wrote: post #26

Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Everyone at GitHub is really excited about this announcement, and I'm happy to answer any questions. We've wanted to make this change for the last 18 months, but needed our Enterprise business to be big enough to enable the free use of GitHub by the rest of the world. I'm happy to say that it's grown dramatically in the last year, and so we're able to make GitHub free for teams that don'…

Hi nat, I came here prepared to ask about how this would play out for annual billing customers since I only just set it up in March. On searching, I can't actually find where you charged me, so I suspect you might have pre-empted this.

So instead of a question, this is more thank you. I'm a tiny bootstrapped startup and was only using 3 of the 5 previously minimum seats. I'm a prime beneficiary of this change, and look forward (fingers crossed) to being one of the enterprise customers that pays for everyone else :D

For others, can you elaborate on how this will work for current annual billing customers, I found some vague references but no detail.

Thank you

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#548

Post by jholman »

eastbayjake wrote: post #512
jfkebwjsbx wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but I think the GP was asking about use cases for a solo dev.

Good clarification! If you're a solo dev who wants to sell your side project to any company >500 people, SAML integration is tablestakes. If you're a solo dev who needs to secure your hobby project on the public internet, it's like bringing a Space Shuttle engine to a knife fight.

If I was in a knife fight, and my buddy showed up and just hit the guy I was fighting with a SSME, I would be totally impressed and also grateful.

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#549

Post by yellowapple »

compscistd wrote: post #277
pubby wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey Nat glad to see you here. A few days ago one of the biggest team collaborative games (Space Station 13) got banned on GitHub without a public explanation from GitHub staff, but some suspect it was because the code contained bad words and slurs. Do you know if this is why the project was banned, and will these new private team repos be subject to the same terms/rules?

If it was the bad words/slurs, could that have been resolved by hiding them behind some basic string manipulation (ex. a caesar cipher)? I can see how GitHub wouldn't want a public repo to have objectionable words, but can't imagine the harm from obfuscating stored copy.

> I can see how GitHub wouldn't want a public repo to have objectionable words

I can't. Does GitHub really have nothing better to do than to play nanny cop because I used a naughty word in my code? Are brainfuck interpreters now off-limits? How about drivers for teledildonics hardware? Or libraries specifically for detecting and filtering swear words? Or maybe I just want to vent a bit in a comment every once in awhile because of some annoyance with the language or target platform or problem to be solved?

Fuck that and the horse it rode in on. We're all adults here (well, or possibly teenagers, but let's face it: they've probably already heard much worse at school).

Not that this seems like the real reason why SS13 got nuked anyway; if GitHub really has some kind of anti-profanity rule, they're doing a real bang-up job of consistently enforcing it: https://github.com/search?q=shit / https://github.com/search?q=piss / https://github.com/search?q=fuck / https://github.com/search?q=cunt / https://github.com/search?q=cocksucker / https://github.com/search?q=motherfucker / https://github.com/search?q=tits

Re: GitHub is now free for teams

#550

Post by jholman »

geofft wrote: post #497
euroq wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, your comment just doesn't make sense. Lightbulb manufacturers are not responsible for wars because tanks have lightbulbs in them, and GitHub is not responsible for all the harm in the world either because some bad actors use GitHub.

Sorry, I can't even discuss this with you. I rather disagree - this is what the whole "military-industrial complex" is about - but it's off-topic and forbidden.

This is totally not what the "military-industrial complex" is about. Wow.

The MIC concept is a specific application of the general idea of regulatory capture of policymakers to the vertical of defence contracting. This is nothing like that: the corporation here isn't a defence contractor and they're not bribing the government. It fits 0%.

Post reply on HN