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

GitHub-Next

githubnext.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: GitHub-Next

#91

Post by kelsolaar »

bern4444 wrote: post #84

Regarding visualization of codebases, something I've wanted for a long time is a graph of function calls across an entire project. I want to know all the callers and callees of every function. This shouldn't be too hard, we already have find references via LSP. Turning this into a graph would make it significantly easier to manage the entry and exit points of a code base and inform architecture decisions, refactors,…

I have been looking for something like that for a while and your reply made me look again. I just came across Codemap (haven’t tried): https://codemap.app/

Re: GitHub-Next

#92

Post by jrmg »

avg_dev wrote: post #90
jacquesm wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's infuriating, when you are large enough you can get away with anything when it comes to copyright violations but I remember the crazy pushback on things like format and time shifting against private individuals.

What is format and time shifting? I am wondering if you mean like code formatting and reordering history, but I’m not really sure. Thanks.

Format shifting: ripping a CD to play on your MP3 player, or cassette tape in the car.

Time shifting: recording TV on VHS to play later.

Re: GitHub-Next

#93

Post by [deleted] »

hbn wrote: post #7

Could they use the blurb of text at the top to give me like... a noun to describe what this is? It just says some vagueness about the future and investigating and exploring. Is it a conference? A team? An initiative? How does it work? Whatever this is supposed to be selling me on, they're doing a terrible job because I can't figure out what it is!

[deleted]

Re: GitHub-Next

#94

Post by bern4444 »

kelsolaar wrote: post #91
bern4444 wrote: post #84

Regarding visualization of codebases, something I've wanted for a long time is a graph of function calls across an entire project. I want to know all the callers and callees of every function. This shouldn't be too hard, we already have find references via LSP. Turning this into a graph would make it significantly easier to manage the entry and exit points of a code base and inform architecture decisions, refactors,…

I have been looking for something like that for a while and your reply made me look again. I just came across Codemap (haven’t tried): https://codemap.app/

Thanks for sharing! This looks pretty close to what I had in mind.

Re: GitHub-Next

#95

Post by madelyn »

bern4444 wrote: post #84

Regarding visualization of codebases, something I've wanted for a long time is a graph of function calls across an entire project. I want to know all the callers and callees of every function. This shouldn't be too hard, we already have find references via LSP. Turning this into a graph would make it significantly easier to manage the entry and exit points of a code base and inform architecture decisions, refactors,…

I ended up doing this for our python codebases at work.

The AST module was super handy as you'd expect. The script would optionally take some filters to reduce the size of the generated graph, and then it sent all the info to Graphiz (it emitted DOT, too, so it could be version controlled!!)

It was extremely fun, highly recommended.

Re: GitHub-Next

#96

Post by tomschlick »

IshKebab wrote: post #69
brockrockman wrote: post #49

Does githubnext.com read as a phishing-adjacent third party to anyone else? Why not deploy as next.github.com subdomain?

This happens all the time because setting up an entirely new domain yourself is way less work than asking the internal IT team to set up a subdomain for you. If the GitHub IT team is reading this then yes, that means you failed.

I'd imagine it's less about setup complexity and more about reducing the attack surface of the main domain where any number of mistakes on the subdomain could expose a vulnerability for the main domain as well.

Re: GitHub-Next

#97

Post by avg_dev »

jrmg wrote: post #92
avg_dev wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is format and time shifting? I am wondering if you mean like code formatting and reordering history, but I’m not really sure. Thanks.

Format shifting: ripping a CD to play on your MP3 player, or cassette tape in the car. Time shifting: recording TV on VHS to play later.

Thanks, and oh wow. Hard to believe that was ever considered problematic. I guess times change.

Re: GitHub-Next

#99

Post by jacquesm »

bastardoperator wrote: post #86
jacquesm wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not complex at all: if you use Copilot to generate code for you you are engaging in copyright infringement. That you got the code from and entity that stole it somewhere else doesn't really matter. Generative models should respect copyright for their sources, and using a generative model to create new works that you intend to claim copyright on is stupid: someone may well show up one day with ironclad proof that…

Except every attorney that has taken a look disagrees with you. So it is complex and unless you have any standing or new data I think it's safe to dismiss your entire argument. https://decoded.legal/blog/2021/06/github-copilot-initial-th... https://fossa.com/blog/analyzing-legal-implications-github-c... https://felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-copilot-is-not-infringin...

Lawyers don't judge cases, judges do.

Until then all you have is opinions, mine is pretty straightforward: if the generative model can be made to work without first training it on other people's code then it isn't copyright infringement, if not then it is transforming one set of works into another.

The only thing that might let GitHub off the hook is their terms of service, but that might mean mass exodus from GitHub because if they interpret you using GitHub to host your code as a blanket permission to do with that code whatever they want then that's clearly not the original intent of the service.

If Microsoft buying GitHub claims that gave them a blanket license to do as they please with the contributions of millions of FOSS contributors then they are still just as bad as they were in the past.

Almost every GitHub repository comes with a license file, even GitHub should have to abide by that license, otherwise the whole thing is pointless.

Post reply on HN