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

Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#901

Post by oculusthrift »

atesti wrote: post #900

I consider this a huge waste of money on Microsoft's part. Why did they create and then shutter codeplex in the first place? Why can't we have multiple competing platforms (Google Code, Github, Codeplex, Sourceforge, bitbucket, etc.)? If I were Microsoft I'd rather invest a smaller amount of money (it surely is much cheaper than acquiring Github!) into making Codeplex the best platform. And then I'd just do a traditi…

Just depends on the product. Microsoft decided to create Teams in house instead of acquiring slack.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#902

Post by wierd0 »

jenscow wrote: post #343
curiousgal wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we're asking the creators of Bing to fix it?

Or whoever implemented the start menu search.

I used to be able to execute programs through the start menu. Can't do that anymore.

I used to go:

press start btn --> type "utor" --> press enter --> uTorrent.exe executes.

Why would they remove such a useful feature?

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#903

Post by ojosilva »

bigbugbag wrote: post #899

Great news ! Maybe now people will understand why github was the wrong was to do things. Using a designed to be decentralized development tool and flocking all in one place, centralizing free software development on proprietary centralized platform is the epitome of not doing things the way they should. Hopefully people will catch the difference between opensource which microsoft is surfing on in a PR effort to regai…

But what would be the alternative then? I mean, GH serves as the de facto opensource social network, it allows private and public collaboration and integrates with many tools creating a web of transparency and free flow of knowledge.

How do we make a similar or comparable service that is decentralized yet transparent and instantly accesible to millions of people across the globe?

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#905

Post by lioeters »

clu3l355 wrote: post #109
lkrubner wrote: post #17

I'm worried. Consider what happened to Skype. Consider what happened to LinkedIn. I worry something similar will happen to Github. And I love Github. At some point Microsoft told me I had to change my password for Skype. The "Reset your password" process failed 6 times in a row. I eventually had to create a new, Microsoft ID, to use Skype. I lost all of my old contacts and had to slowly recreate my address book. This…

I had a pretty similar experience with skype. I lost access to my connected email account and was essentially locked out of my account forever - repeated emails to support were met with silence, alas! Then I connected my facebook account to use skype instead... then they discontinued support for that. Now it's got to a point where attempting to create a new account on the OSX desktop version just shows an error scree…

Could you tell us what "other, better solutions" would you recommend?

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#906

Post by dean177 »

tootie wrote: post #827
PascLeRasc wrote: post #34

This is sad news. Partially because I don't care for Microsoft, but mostly because Github was a neutral third-party without any priorities. I hope they don't discontinue Atom or apply their UX styling to the site/desktop app. Like Spotify, I felt safer that a company was just doing hosting in their domain (of music or code projects) and wouldn't try to shovel some other tech into it like Apple making Apple Music terr…

GitHub has had more ethics fails in the past few years than MS.

Care to elaborate?

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#907

Post by lioeters »

nelsonic wrote: post #123

Just when it looked like GitHub was "sustainable" through revenue ... greed for a "payout" (VCs wanting to exit the "bubble") and they sell out to the worst software Monopoly notorious for stifling software creativity through anti-competitive practices! :-( Can't GitHub just sell stock/shares to the GitHub community to secure their own independent future? I would buy a few (thousand) shares ... Who else would buy sto…

This point exactly. To me the move is a clear symptom that GitHub leadership has lost touch with the original vision/philosophy that made the platform popular in the first place.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#908

Post by lioeters »

jasonvorhe wrote: post #536
EastSmith wrote: post #520

I am very interested in what will happen with these accounts (t name a few) the next few weeks / months: https://github.com/torvalds/linux https://github.com/mozilla https://github.com/google

Do you seriously expect anything to happen to these accounts? On what grounds?

I'm guessing: access to all private repos.

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#909

Post by Libbum »

pera wrote: post #403
nyxtom wrote: post #197

It's interesting that the HN community continues to make reference to the prospect of a decentralized internet when Git was built to be decentralized in the first place. In spite of this, we all have congregated around GitHub for the community and are shocked when the centralized source we've been using gets acquired by a company we don't trust. That's sort of the whole point of centralization, you can't trust it. Ma…

Indeed. It would be awesome if GitLab could make use of ActivityPub to create such decentralized network (à la Mastodon)...

This is currently being investigated: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/4517

Re: Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub

#910

Post by TheAceOfHearts »

nicwest wrote: post #739
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily migrate your repo to a different service, so having lots of developers rely on GitHub isn't really a big deal. Many large projects have GitHub mirrors. I'd say the biggest issue is that Git doesn't include better built-in support for issues, wikis, PRs / code reviews, and releases. Compare that to Fossil [0], which lets you bundle up everything into a single file. If there was better built-in support y…

> Git doesn't include better built-in support for issues, wikis, PRs / code reviews, and releases I feel like a lot of these features could be handled with git-notes[1]. For example git-appraise[2] uses the git-notes feature for a code review system: [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-notes [2] https://github.com/google/git-appraise

Thanks for sharing, I'd never heard of git-notes before! That's really cool. I'd previously wondered why there wasn't something like this available; it looks like I just wasn't aware of its existence. I definitely agree that you could implement many powerful features using this.

Now I'm wondering if someone has implement a release tracker using git-notes. After you tag the release you could build / generate the output assets (e.g. binaries), upload them to some remotes (e.g. S3, GitHub, your server), and add a note with the release info plus some links.

I've already thought up a couple ideas for things that could be built on top of git-notes.

Post reply on HN