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

NPM Is Joining GitHub

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 588 posts

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#561

Post by gtyras2mrs »

Summershard wrote: post #550
tikiman163 wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skype is crap, it was doomed to die around that time frame anyway. If anything, Microsoft Business kept Skype going longer than it would have otherwise. Seriously, go use products like Google Hangouts, Slack or Microsoft Teams (Microsofts's surprisingly better clone of Slack) and then tell me that Skype was ruined by integrating with Microsoft's other product base. The closest argument you might be able to make is th…

> Microsoft Teams (Microsofts's surprisingly better clone of Slack) Personal experience, but I have not found a single person who likes MS Teams. Usually people around me say that Slack is ok-ish, while MS Teams is crap.

While Teams isn't as good as Slack IMO, it is better than the experience of using Skype (Lync) For Business by a country mile.

I've the misfortune of being forced to use Skype and I would kill to have it replaced with Teams at my workplace.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#562

Post by sequoia »

ss3000 wrote: post #547
sequoia wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Microsoft's perspective, what's the advantage to them or their users to pay for two somewhat similar free offerings to be worked on in parallel? Given that one was gaining in popularity by leaps and bounds while the other was rapidly losing market share and relevance, what course would you recommend? "Fund both indefinitely, to keep the handful of atom users that want new features happy"? Be reasonable.

I don't think anybody's expecting them to fund both indefinitely, but given that their soon-to-be new CEO went on the record to say that they would actually keep funding Atom development, I feel it's fairly reasonable to expect that they wouldn't pull funding from Atom almost completely as soon as the acquisition went through. That's a really shitty move no matter how you look at it.

I agree it was stupid of them to placate people by making promises they don't intend to keep.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#563

Post by chipotle_coyote »

lewisl9029 wrote: post #449
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counter thesis: what "killed" Atom is the balance of user enthusiasm quickly shifting to VSCode. Well before the acquisition was even announced, VSCode started grabbing developer mindshare real, real fast. I remember being an Atom user who resisted that tide for a while, but it became pretty clear that VSCode was taking off like a rocket and Atom, well, wasn't. If commit activity graphs are really a meaningful measur…

It would be delusional of me to claim that VSCode wasn't already winning in terms of mindshare by a large margin when the acquisition happened. That's not what I'm claiming here. Atom still had a healthy number of active contributors (presumably most of them were from GitHub) making improvements to the product on a daily basis to make it a perfectly viable tool for the people who chose to use it (and despite the much…

I agree, it's probable that there's been a decision to de-prioritize Atom in favor of VSCode. And sure, I get being upset about that, and about GitHub not confirming that this is what's happening if it really is what's happening.

But the words of the linked Reddit comment from Nat Friedman were "we will continue to develop and support both Atom and VS Code going forward"; that's a true statement today. Atom is currently being developed and supported. That's a case of adhering to the letter of the statement rather than the spirit, I know. But that circles around to the problem of VSCode's rapid ascent in mindshare -- if your company ends up owning two very similar editors and they both have roughly equal downloads and community interest, you might try to support both equally. But if one of them has orders of magnitude more downloads and community interest than the other, you're going to focus your efforts on the popular one.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#564

Post by chipotle_coyote »

ss3000 wrote: post #547
sequoia wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Microsoft's perspective, what's the advantage to them or their users to pay for two somewhat similar free offerings to be worked on in parallel? Given that one was gaining in popularity by leaps and bounds while the other was rapidly losing market share and relevance, what course would you recommend? "Fund both indefinitely, to keep the handful of atom users that want new features happy"? Be reasonable.

I don't think anybody's expecting them to fund both indefinitely, but given that their soon-to-be new CEO went on the record to say that they would actually keep funding Atom development, I feel it's fairly reasonable to expect that they wouldn't pull funding from Atom almost completely as soon as the acquisition went through. That's a really shitty move no matter how you look at it.

He said "we will continue to develop and support both Atom and VS Code going forward," which at least of right now is still happening -- Atom 1.45 was released last week, along with 1.46 beta 0. The conjecture that they've effectively defunded it is reasonable, but it's still conjecture, and even if they have it doesn't actually break Friedman's (possibly quite deliberately worded) statement.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#565

Post by fastball »

shakna wrote: post #422
fastball wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which package manager has the scale of JS and isn't hosted by a commercial entity?

apt, pacman, pip, and others. You can have large scale systems that aren't dependent on a commercial entity.

I mean, the scale of pacman is miniscule compared to NPM. PyPI is hosted by AWS and Google.

Not sure how APT works in the linux community can really work for anyone else, but definitely worth a shot for sure.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#566

Post by nerdwaller »

sah2ed wrote: post #481
nerdwaller wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also NPM is quite a bit bigger than both the Ruby and Python library spaces. I don’t know, so I have to ask, what’s the metric here?

Perhaps because Node code bases when deployed cause the package manager (npm) to consume more bandwidth in general than comparable Ruby or Python code bases due to higher dependence on third-party packages? As at Oct. 2018, the top 12 npm packages [1] were already doing more than 0.5 billion downloads a month. Granted, popularity has waned for a few of those top packages due to deprecation or new language features, f…

You're probably right with all the one-off and fairly small dependencies in the npm ecosystem. Seeing those numbers would be pretty neat to compare side-by-side.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#567

Post by cutemonster »

paavohtl wrote: post #522
teknopaul wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So the important thing is how they make npm economically viable." Thats not the important thing, thats the problem. Npm could easily be an open source client. Contain less code and be better. And have a mirors system like every other repo so it does not need money for hosting. Npm wanted to control nodejs and make money out it. And they have. Microsoft purchased that control and plan to make money out of it. This is…

> Npm could easily be an open source client The NPM client is and has always been open source: https://github.com/npm/cli . > Npm wanted to control nodejs and make money out it. And they have. In what way, other than offering private package hosting for enterprises?

By selling / "doing an exit" to GitHub?

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#568

Post by teknopaul »

skrebbel wrote: post #521
teknopaul wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So the important thing is how they make npm economically viable." Thats not the important thing, thats the problem. Npm could easily be an open source client. Contain less code and be better. And have a mirors system like every other repo so it does not need money for hosting. Npm wanted to control nodejs and make money out it. And they have. Microsoft purchased that control and plan to make money out of it. This is…

> Npm wanted to control nodejs and make money out it. What does this even mean?

It means Npm always wanted to be the "one true source" for nodejs code. No matter who wrote the code.

No interest in mirrors from day one.

Npm sold out to Microsoft and got paid. All that free community effort to stop Npms "crashiness" got sold to Microsoft for dollar.

Nodejs went to the Linux foundation.

Npm went to Microsoft.

Suprised?

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#569

Post by teknopaul »

oaiey wrote: post #549
teknopaul wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gihub already had a masssive social graph. They know who you are in terms of who you work for and who your CTO is. Npm does not know that about me. It has no sales channel.

GitHub is owned by the same entity that owns LinkedIn. Microsoft has really no problems cross linking persons. They can also easily link the source code between the systems etc (if they want).

And they will, to the extent possible by law.

And they will ask you, under the guise of 2fa, to confirm thier suspicions.

And $7 a month gets plently of new upgrade options offered.

All talk of mirrors gets brushed under the carpet.

Microsoft pwn all nodejs code except core and those savvy enough to spot this coming and distribute via debian repos.

Re: NPM Is Joining GitHub

#570

Post by teknopaul »

jki275 wrote: post #507
sneak wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative is that the entire source control system (GitHub) and the entire artifact registry (npm) are run by a giant multinational military defense contractor with close and longstanding ties to the US military. Did we forget so soon that the Snowden slides are PowerPoint ? I'm not sure that's an improvement in any way whatsoever.

The military is a MS customer, just like nearly everyone else on the planet. Calling them a “defense contractor” is a very long stretch.

No its not.
Post reply on HN