Something like this happening was a major factor in why I decided that I was going to use GitLab for Tildes's repos, even though I'm way more familiar with GitHub. GitHub is way too deep in that...
Something like this happening was a major factor in why I decided that I was going to use GitLab for Tildes's repos, even though I'm way more familiar with GitHub. GitHub is way too deep in that venture capital hole, so an acquisition (or maybe IPO) is probably their only real option at this point. I'm sure they have a good number of business customers, but very unlikely it's anything near what they need to pay back returns on $350M worth of VC.
The GitLab people really care about FOSS. gitlab.com runs on their enterprise version of GitLab, which meant that the client-side code wasn't FOSS. Someone brought this up and the company changed...
The GitLab people really care about FOSS. gitlab.com runs on their enterprise version of GitLab, which meant that the client-side code wasn't FOSS. Someone brought this up and the company changed the license on the enterprise GitLab's front end code to a FOSS license.
To be fair, the Microsoft of 2018 seems considerably less awful than the 2011 Microsoft. Skype got shafted, but Minecraft and LinkedIn seem to be largely unmolested.
To be fair, the Microsoft of 2018 seems considerably less awful than the 2011 Microsoft.
Skype got shafted, but Minecraft and LinkedIn seem to be largely unmolested.
I don't start trusting a company that was the literal (moral) scum of the Earth for over a decade because they had one "good" year. It'll take more to convince me of their change of heart than...
I don't start trusting a company that was the literal (moral) scum of the Earth for over a decade because they had one "good" year. It'll take more to convince me of their change of heart than "not fucking up shit too hard" for a little while. For all we know, it could just be another phase of the "Embrace" paradigm, and we know what follows this. It's been their pattern since their inception, it would be foolish to assume they wouldn't do it this time.
I would quibble with the assertion that LinkedIn is still good. I don't know if it ever was good, but the constant user-hostile nags in the mobile web site to use the app are a dead giveaway that...
I would quibble with the assertion that LinkedIn is still good. I don't know if it ever was good, but the constant user-hostile nags in the mobile web site to use the app are a dead giveaway that it doesn't particularly care about making its users' lives easier. More or less every kind of action has a "doing whatever this is would be easier in the app" interruptive notification that deliberately hinders the user from doing the thing.
I'm worried that the same thing will happen to Github and that it will set open source back years.
Don't bother getting the app, it's just as bad. All the notifications are clickbait, "Someone did something - click here to find out who and what". And in the app as well there is the constant...
Don't bother getting the app, it's just as bad. All the notifications are clickbait, "Someone did something - click here to find out who and what". And in the app as well there is the constant "Something's going on, become a paying user to find out what".
Microsoft learned a lot about how not to look like an evil empire the last time it got them into trouble. Since losing scrutiny from regulators per the results of the Web Browser Wars, they’ve...
Microsoft learned a lot about how not to look like an evil empire the last time it got them into trouble.
Since losing scrutiny from regulators per the results of the Web Browser Wars, they’ve actually started doing a lot of groundwork-laying that looks rather innocuous on its own, but becomes far more insidious from above. (Anyone trying to wrangle Windows 10 for large enterprises is dealing with this now. At first it looks like folks get a shiny new upgrade, with lots of great perks granted, but in doing so IT loses a bit of power and choice over how they run their workstations, and are now forced to march to an upgrade beat that requires more work to maintain than before.)
Updating is annoying, but I'd hardly say it's a sign Microsoft is some evil entity. Having people update their machines is important and it's clear companies have pretty lax about it. So while...
Updating is annoying, but I'd hardly say it's a sign Microsoft is some evil entity. Having people update their machines is important and it's clear companies have pretty lax about it. So while forcing people is aggressive and causes some problems, it does help keep Windows 10 devices connected to the Internet less vulnerable than they otherwise would be.
For SECURITY patches I 100% agree. Microsoft doesn’t let you do just security patches anymore though. Eventually you need to do Feature Upgrades, at least 1 a year, or the security updates stop....
For SECURITY patches I 100% agree.
Microsoft doesn’t let you do just security patches anymore though. Eventually you need to do Feature Upgrades, at least 1 a year, or the security updates stop.
It's completely fair to not like that aspect. Although it still makes sense in that Microsoft doesn't want to have to maintain two branching structures.
It's completely fair to not like that aspect. Although it still makes sense in that Microsoft doesn't want to have to maintain two branching structures.
During the Minecraft acquisition I remember hearing that Mojang had set up a "firewall" between them and Microsoft. This limits what Microsoft can actually do to the game.
During the Minecraft acquisition I remember hearing that Mojang had set up a "firewall" between them and Microsoft. This limits what Microsoft can actually do to the game.
I wouldnt' say I agree with that. Modern microsoft is the one with the Windows 10 tracking, the ads, the user data collection, the blatant disregard for EU anti-monopoly sanctions. It has changed...
I wouldnt' say I agree with that. Modern microsoft is the one with the Windows 10 tracking, the ads, the user data collection, the blatant disregard for EU anti-monopoly sanctions.
From my experience, GitLab is literally just an improved Github at every technical aspect. It supports everything you can get on Github (and a whole lot more), and you can easily migrate to a...
From my experience, GitLab is literally just an improved Github at every technical aspect. It supports everything you can get on Github (and a whole lot more), and you can easily migrate to a self-hosted, free software version if desired later down the line.
I would recommend going to GitLab. I would recommend doing that ages ago.
BitBucket is also very nice. GitHub's main draw is the large userbase and social features, to be honest. The site functionality isn't lacking, but it's not nearly as cutting-edge as it once was.
BitBucket is also very nice. GitHub's main draw is the large userbase and social features, to be honest. The site functionality isn't lacking, but it's not nearly as cutting-edge as it once was.
Does BitBucket have a free software release that can be easily migrated to? If not, it's no better than Github in case someone comes along and purchases it. Functionality-wise, I do think Github...
Does BitBucket have a free software release that can be easily migrated to? If not, it's no better than Github in case someone comes along and purchases it.
Functionality-wise, I do think Github is very behind it's main competitor. Github does not support:
Respecting WIP prefixes (marks a PR/MR as a work in progress, and thus cannot be merged yet)
Good support for git-flow (GitLab has a button on each issue to branch out and set up a WIP MR)
Repository mirroring to other services
Private repositories for all users
Confidential issues (Issues only readable to the submitter and high-ranking repository members)
Integrated Docker repository (so you can maintain docker images for your project with the repository)
It's already been purchased, it's owned by Atlassian (the maker of Jira, also recently acquired Trello).
Does BitBucket have a free software release that can be easily migrated to? If not, it's no better than Github in case someone comes along and purchases it.
It's already been purchased, it's owned by Atlassian (the maker of Jira, also recently acquired Trello).
It was a long time ago, looks like they acquired it on Sept 29, 2010: https://techcrunch.com/2010/09/29/atlassian-buys-mercurial-project-hosting-site-bitbucket/
I only just finished learning GitHub and figuring it all out and setting up a static blog there for my projects and and ... Ugh. Somehow I keep investing my time in projects that fail right when...
I only just finished learning GitHub and figuring it all out and setting up a static blog there for my projects and and ... Ugh.
Somehow I keep investing my time in projects that fail right when I'm getting into them. Reader. Wave. The list goes on forever.
Luckily all of your git knowledge is transferable. And considering GitHub Pages is just Jekyll, you can easily convert your static blog over to GitLab Pages or even self-host it.
Luckily all of your git knowledge is transferable. And considering GitHub Pages is just Jekyll, you can easily convert your static blog over to GitLab Pages or even self-host it.
I'm a lot more optimistic about a possible acquisition than a lot of you seem to be. Microsoft has been playing better with free software lately than a lot of other major software companies....
I'm a lot more optimistic about a possible acquisition than a lot of you seem to be. Microsoft has been playing better with free software lately than a lot of other major software companies. There's also not a lot Microsoft can do to github to try to harm competitors since it's relatively easy to transfer projects from github to another service. Of course, Microsoft could start acting less benevolent under future leadership, but the same could be said of the GitHub leadership. I would argue Microsoft is actually less likely to somehow harm the service in the future, simply because they don't need to make a profit from it.
The problem people (including myself) typically have with Microsoft is that they have this tendency lately to take perfectly good products and services and completely ruin them. Skype has become a...
The problem people (including myself) typically have with Microsoft is that they have this tendency lately to take perfectly good products and services and completely ruin them. Skype has become a disaster, Windows 10 is a mess, their Office suite moved to a purely subscription model, their Outlook system is a bloated piece of shit (coming from someone who signed up for a hotmail account ages ago), their loading times for any of their services have been abysmal, their Windows 10 apps are trash, the UI for most of their products is just awful... really anything they've placed their grubby little mitts on lately has gotten worse.
Naturally we're looking at a possible GitHub acquisition and immediately digging its grave well ahead of time because we've learned what to expect from Microsoft.
Perhaps, but they're still not very good with it. Being not as bad as some others for the past year doesn't make them good yet. As I've said before in this thread, it's foolish to simply forget...
Microsoft has been playing better with free software lately
Perhaps, but they're still not very good with it. Being not as bad as some others for the past year doesn't make them good yet. As I've said before in this thread, it's foolish to simply forget all of their wrongdoings and look only at their very recent semi-good doings. Microsoft has lived its entire existence with the mentality of "embrace, extend, extinguish". It's most likely they just started the cycle anew, and we're seeing "embrace" right now.
As @Emerald_Knight also points out, their more recent actions with regards to spyware in their OS that you cannot properly turn off show that they clearly still don't respect their users in any way or form.
they don't need to make a profit from it.
I think you misunderstand how a company works. You need to make money. And especially in this day and age, where making profit of itself isn't enough anymore. You need to make more money, all the time. If you made a million dollars in profit last month, you need to make one and a half million dollars the next month. It's silly at best to suggest that they're not after more money.
Obviously Microsoft needs to make a profit overall. My point is that they don't need to make a profit in all their divisions, as long as they are making a profit overall. They can accept their...
I think you misunderstand how a company works. You need to make money. And especially in this day and age, where making profit of itself isn't enough anymore. You need to make more money, all the time. If you made a million dollars in profit last month, you need to make one and a half million dollars the next month. It's silly at best to suggest that they're not after more money.
Obviously Microsoft needs to make a profit overall. My point is that they don't need to make a profit in all their divisions, as long as they are making a profit overall. They can accept their github division losing money if it provides value for them in terms of having an easy to use open source software repository.
Something like this happening was a major factor in why I decided that I was going to use GitLab for Tildes's repos, even though I'm way more familiar with GitHub. GitHub is way too deep in that venture capital hole, so an acquisition (or maybe IPO) is probably their only real option at this point. I'm sure they have a good number of business customers, but very unlikely it's anything near what they need to pay back returns on $350M worth of VC.
Tildes and GitLab do pair nicely as alternates to major for-profit services. I wonder if there's room for a non-profit Git service.
The GitLab people really care about FOSS. gitlab.com runs on their enterprise version of GitLab, which meant that the client-side code wasn't FOSS. Someone brought this up and the company changed the license on the enterprise GitLab's front end code to a FOSS license.
To be fair, the Microsoft of 2018 seems considerably less awful than the 2011 Microsoft.
Skype got shafted, but Minecraft and LinkedIn seem to be largely unmolested.
I don't start trusting a company that was the literal (moral) scum of the Earth for over a decade because they had one "good" year. It'll take more to convince me of their change of heart than "not fucking up shit too hard" for a little while. For all we know, it could just be another phase of the "Embrace" paradigm, and we know what follows this. It's been their pattern since their inception, it would be foolish to assume they wouldn't do it this time.
I would quibble with the assertion that LinkedIn is still good. I don't know if it ever was good, but the constant user-hostile nags in the mobile web site to use the app are a dead giveaway that it doesn't particularly care about making its users' lives easier. More or less every kind of action has a "doing whatever this is would be easier in the app" interruptive notification that deliberately hinders the user from doing the thing.
I'm worried that the same thing will happen to Github and that it will set open source back years.
Don't bother getting the app, it's just as bad. All the notifications are clickbait, "Someone did something - click here to find out who and what". And in the app as well there is the constant "Something's going on, become a paying user to find out what".
Microsoft learned a lot about how not to look like an evil empire the last time it got them into trouble.
Since losing scrutiny from regulators per the results of the Web Browser Wars, they’ve actually started doing a lot of groundwork-laying that looks rather innocuous on its own, but becomes far more insidious from above. (Anyone trying to wrangle Windows 10 for large enterprises is dealing with this now. At first it looks like folks get a shiny new upgrade, with lots of great perks granted, but in doing so IT loses a bit of power and choice over how they run their workstations, and are now forced to march to an upgrade beat that requires more work to maintain than before.)
Updating is annoying, but I'd hardly say it's a sign Microsoft is some evil entity. Having people update their machines is important and it's clear companies have pretty lax about it. So while forcing people is aggressive and causes some problems, it does help keep Windows 10 devices connected to the Internet less vulnerable than they otherwise would be.
For SECURITY patches I 100% agree.
Microsoft doesn’t let you do just security patches anymore though. Eventually you need to do Feature Upgrades, at least 1 a year, or the security updates stop.
That is no bueno.
It's completely fair to not like that aspect. Although it still makes sense in that Microsoft doesn't want to have to maintain two branching structures.
For sure- but they could also make things easier
During the Minecraft acquisition I remember hearing that Mojang had set up a "firewall" between them and Microsoft. This limits what Microsoft can actually do to the game.
I don't use GitHub nearly as much as I'd like to, but the thought of Microsoft acquiring them is pretty worrying.
Modern Microsoft is much better than Microsoft of old. I can see why it'd be a bit worrying, however.
I wouldnt' say I agree with that. Modern microsoft is the one with the Windows 10 tracking, the ads, the user data collection, the blatant disregard for EU anti-monopoly sanctions.
It has changed but it's still a monster.
As someone in /r/linux put it,
From my experience, GitLab is literally just an improved Github at every technical aspect. It supports everything you can get on Github (and a whole lot more), and you can easily migrate to a self-hosted, free software version if desired later down the line.
I would recommend going to GitLab. I would recommend doing that ages ago.
+1 for GitLab. I've used it many times and it works perfectly. I'd say better than Github in my opinion.
BitBucket is also very nice. GitHub's main draw is the large userbase and social features, to be honest. The site functionality isn't lacking, but it's not nearly as cutting-edge as it once was.
Does BitBucket have a free software release that can be easily migrated to? If not, it's no better than Github in case someone comes along and purchases it.
Functionality-wise, I do think Github is very behind it's main competitor. Github does not support:
WIPprefixes (marks a PR/MR as a work in progress, and thus cannot be merged yet)And I'm sure there's plenty more if I'd think hard about it.
It's already been purchased, it's owned by Atlassian (the maker of Jira, also recently acquired Trello).
It wasn't always owned by Atlassian? News to me...
It was a long time ago, looks like they acquired it on Sept 29, 2010: https://techcrunch.com/2010/09/29/atlassian-buys-mercurial-project-hosting-site-bitbucket/
BitBucket also allows (limited) private repositories for free.
Nononononononopleaseno
edit: I actually change my stance to gitlab is better
Glad I have a gitlab set up
I only just finished learning GitHub and figuring it all out and setting up a static blog there for my projects and and ... Ugh.
Somehow I keep investing my time in projects that fail right when I'm getting into them. Reader. Wave. The list goes on forever.
Luckily all of your
gitknowledge is transferable. And considering GitHub Pages is just Jekyll, you can easily convert your static blog over to GitLab Pages or even self-host it.Cool I was wondering about how transferrable it all is. I'll look into it, thanks.
I'm a lot more optimistic about a possible acquisition than a lot of you seem to be. Microsoft has been playing better with free software lately than a lot of other major software companies. There's also not a lot Microsoft can do to github to try to harm competitors since it's relatively easy to transfer projects from github to another service. Of course, Microsoft could start acting less benevolent under future leadership, but the same could be said of the GitHub leadership. I would argue Microsoft is actually less likely to somehow harm the service in the future, simply because they don't need to make a profit from it.
The problem people (including myself) typically have with Microsoft is that they have this tendency lately to take perfectly good products and services and completely ruin them. Skype has become a disaster, Windows 10 is a mess, their Office suite moved to a purely subscription model, their Outlook system is a bloated piece of shit (coming from someone who signed up for a hotmail account ages ago), their loading times for any of their services have been abysmal, their Windows 10 apps are trash, the UI for most of their products is just awful... really anything they've placed their grubby little mitts on lately has gotten worse.
Naturally we're looking at a possible GitHub acquisition and immediately digging its grave well ahead of time because we've learned what to expect from Microsoft.
Perhaps, but they're still not very good with it. Being not as bad as some others for the past year doesn't make them good yet. As I've said before in this thread, it's foolish to simply forget all of their wrongdoings and look only at their very recent semi-good doings. Microsoft has lived its entire existence with the mentality of "embrace, extend, extinguish". It's most likely they just started the cycle anew, and we're seeing "embrace" right now.
As @Emerald_Knight also points out, their more recent actions with regards to spyware in their OS that you cannot properly turn off show that they clearly still don't respect their users in any way or form.
I think you misunderstand how a company works. You need to make money. And especially in this day and age, where making profit of itself isn't enough anymore. You need to make more money, all the time. If you made a million dollars in profit last month, you need to make one and a half million dollars the next month. It's silly at best to suggest that they're not after more money.
Obviously Microsoft needs to make a profit overall. My point is that they don't need to make a profit in all their divisions, as long as they are making a profit overall. They can accept their github division losing money if it provides value for them in terms of having an easy to use open source software repository.