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

Ghostty is leaving GitHub

mitchellh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#851

Post by kalcode »

mitchellh wrote: post #26

I know this is ridiculously dramatic, but its the truth: I actually cried writing this blog post (tears hit my keyboard, I'm embarrassed to say). Nobody should cry over a SaaS, of all things. But GitHub has meant so much more to me than that (all laid out in the post). I have an unhealthy relationship with it. Its given me so much and I'm so thankful for it. But, it's not what it used to be. I don't know. We've been…

Vagrant I used a lot early on in my career to learn Ruby on Rails in Windows. Thanks a lot for your work!

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#852

Post by Andrex »

jarjoura wrote: post #557
bsimpson wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like MS went out of its way to make a point that GitHub and NPM would be independent orgs that no longer had to worry about making keep-the-lights-on money. It was positioned as a benevolent acquisition for the good of the development community. As so often happens, that didn't last long. Nest was originally independent. Didn't take long for it to merge with the Google Home brand. I'm sure there are countless…

GitHub had no reason to sell to Microsoft, they could have remained the bootstrapped company they started as, and rode the SaaS boom, since they were profitable on day 1. Seems a bit unfair to blame Microsoft though, because it was the founders who decided they wanted that sweet VC funding and Andreessen was happy to pay out. Not sure if it mattered after that but they had that weird Tom Preston-Werner scandal that g…

Would definitely read a book about this.

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#853

Post by Andrex »

sho_hn wrote: post #292
JuniperMesos wrote: post #36

I can appreciate Hashimoto's genuine feelings about Github, and the world of open-source software development that it opened for him and that he spent a significant chunk of his life participating in. On the other hand, I can't help but think that some of this heartbreak would have been avoidable, if only he possessed more of the Richard-Stallman-esque attitude that non-free software is inherently suspect and unethic…

> Github has always been non-free software hosted by someone else, and run according to its owners' rules and for its owners' benefit, not ultimately the end user. This was true in 2008 and it's true today. Yup. At KDE we never seriously considered GitHub. We always built our own git infra, and eventually landed on GitLab, after banding together with Gnome and a (generous and forthcoming) GitLab to convince them to m…

Seeing KDE and Gnome come together isn't exactly uncommon but it still warms my heart reading about it.

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#854

Post by draw_down »

arn3n wrote: post #3

What do we think is more to blame for GitHub's massive decrease in quality? I've heard the following theories: 1. Increasing amount of AI-generated code in their codebase, decreasing the quality of the service. 2. Bought by Microsoft, and their bad engineering culture has spread to GitHub. Perhaps it's a bit of both.

[dead]

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#855

Post by franktankbank »

ahf8Aithaex7Nai wrote: post #629

The thing you love has been bought by Microsoft. When things belong to a large corporation, they can (and probably will) drift off in some absurd direction, because in a way, the relationship is reversed. The thing no longer serves you; instead, the brand, the user base, the reputation, and the key role and function of the thing are put at the service of investors. In this process, you are demoted from subject to obj…

Also they own your code in any real sense.

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#856

Post by pc86 »

regularfry wrote: post #380
MatthiasPortzel wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React gets blamed for this because the error handling is bad and the UX is confusing. But the issue with GitHub’s frontend is that the backend is dropping requests. When you click a button on GitHub and the loader gets stuck that’s because there no timeout/error handling in the JavaScript but there also no reply from the server. I feel like React is getting a bad rap because it’s visible when the issue is clearly the…

> React gets blamed for this because the error handling is bad and the UX is confusing Yes, it does. > React is getting a bad rap because it’s visible when the issue is clearly their backend. Two things can be bad! Except that in this case one of them is unnecessarily bad, because nobody forced them to use a front end system which defaults to terrible failure handling.

It's also not tautological that React apps have bad error handling. You can do proper error handling and retry logic in React, and I can't for the life of me understand why GitHub engineers making several hundred thousand a year in cash and at least that much in stock simply... don't?

It's no wonder my jobs feed is flooded with senior engineering positions at GitHub (one wonders if they're growing, or jettisoning dead weight) but I can't imagine it's a good look for the resume to put GitHub on it at this point.

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#857

Post by osigurdson »

davedx wrote: post #786
osigurdson wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect it isn't even really "greed". It is just the slow mold growth of an org chart optimizing comfort for itself instead of value for customers. Generally, startups / founders are the only anti-bodies against this type of behavior.

It most certainly is also greed. Stockholders want returns. One way to do that is maximize profits at all costs. Greed.

How does low quality translate to shareholder returns?

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#858

Post by funkaster »

preisschild wrote: post #438
funkaster wrote: post #422

I really like forgejo, but for OSS it's a complete no-no unless they want to manage PRs by email. Maintaining a forgejo instance and allowing anyone to join is a recipe for headaches. Until forgejo figures out the federation aspect (allow to send PRs from other forgejo instances, or some other distributed way), it will be hard for OSS to adopt them and keep the collaboration aspect.

Why is it a no-no? Arent FOSS projects like Gadgetbridge or Forgejo itself using their PR system?

It's just a PITA to contribute, compared to platforms with wider adoption like github/gitlab.

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#859

Post by zoobab »

throwatdem12311 wrote: post #782

Copilot and vibe coding being pushed so aggressively by Microslop and Slophub that it’s now killing their core product. Mitchell said on X if he was in charge, he would shut down copilot completely. It might bring in revenue but without core GitHub, Copilot also goes to zero and he’s totally right about this. It makes absolutely no sense for Microslop to have Copilot when they have such a huge stake in OpenAI and the…

Push your AI code on GitSlop, nowa available on gitslop.com.

Re: Ghostty is leaving GitHub

#860

Post by pc86 »

12_throw_away wrote: post #256
pc86 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is surprising to me, I would have bet money that all the people who actively engage in this type of language/framework war discourse were all drawing Social Security by now.

There's a big difference between a war between two somewhat equivalent things that make different choices (editor wars, language wars, etc.) vs pointing out that certain things are really fundamentally ... not good. IMO we all need to be much louder and clearer about how bad things are, and how much better they could be. This is, in fact, on topic: github actions seemed to me like a bad idea from the start, to me, bu…

It is certainly possible that you are brilliant and your co-workers and the industry writ large are all morons. That you were right all along, and chickens roosting and all that, though it seems at least equally as likely that this is not the case.
Post reply on HN