That's the reason why they did that. They want to become The Default website to go, especially with the GitLab threat - and with Microsoft funding, they no longer care about money. But this is...
Whether you’re a student about to write your first line of code, an enterprise leader with teams around the world, or an open source maintainer, we want GitHub to be the best place for you to code, collaborate, and connect with the global community of developers.
That's the reason why they did that. They want to become The Default website to go, especially with the GitLab threat - and with Microsoft funding, they no longer care about money. But this is just my assumption, as I couldn't find public statistics of GitHub usage and Google Trends aren't particularly helpful.
It was always a bit strange that you had to pay to have private repos on GitHub, when they were easily available for free on Bitbucket, GitLab, and other similar sites. I think this is a good...
It was always a bit strange that you had to pay to have private repos on GitHub, when they were easily available for free on Bitbucket, GitLab, and other similar sites. I think this is a good change, but will probably hurt their revenue a bit (but that probably doesn't matter as much any more, after being acquired by Microsoft).
Was it really strange? I get that it looked like a weird mark against them next to other things on offer, but the site had to monetize itself somehow and charging money for part of the...
Was it really strange? I get that it looked like a weird mark against them next to other things on offer, but the site had to monetize itself somehow and charging money for part of the functionality which creates their operating costs always seemed largely sensible to me. Bitbucket of course had Atlassian and their warchest to live off, and GitLab had VC funds which allowed them to more readily hand out larger and larger repos for free.
Yes, because they wanted to try to keep GitHub as the default choice for developers to be hosting their repos. Hosting private repos will generally be a pretty small drain on their resources, and...
Yes, because they wanted to try to keep GitHub as the default choice for developers to be hosting their repos. Hosting private repos will generally be a pretty small drain on their resources, and $7/month is a lot to ask just so people could keep a few personal projects non-public. That ended up with a lot of people (including me) just keeping their private repos on Bitbucket/GitLab instead, and only their public ones on GitHub. The risk there is that people will get used to the other sites too, and decide it's actually more convenient to just move everything over to the same one as their private repos.
Before September, GitLab had only taken $45M in VC, and GitHub $300M. So I certainly don't think it was about GitLab having more resources to be able to offer private repos.
Looks like simple marketing to me. Users are hearing this news and was to see what the others offer and they will see this new blog post showing that gitlab still has a better free plan.
Looks like simple marketing to me. Users are hearing this news and was to see what the others offer and they will see this new blog post showing that gitlab still has a better free plan.
The other differences are shown in the big chart at the bottom of https://github.com/pricing There's not much, maybe the only other one that might be important at all is that you can only use...
There's not much, maybe the only other one that might be important at all is that you can only use Pages and Wikis on private repos with a paid subscription.
That's the reason why they did that. They want to become The Default website to go, especially with the GitLab threat - and with Microsoft funding, they no longer care about money. But this is just my assumption, as I couldn't find public statistics of GitHub usage and Google Trends aren't particularly helpful.
It was always a bit strange that you had to pay to have private repos on GitHub, when they were easily available for free on Bitbucket, GitLab, and other similar sites. I think this is a good change, but will probably hurt their revenue a bit (but that probably doesn't matter as much any more, after being acquired by Microsoft).
Was it really strange? I get that it looked like a weird mark against them next to other things on offer, but the site had to monetize itself somehow and charging money for part of the functionality which creates their operating costs always seemed largely sensible to me. Bitbucket of course had Atlassian and their warchest to live off, and GitLab had VC funds which allowed them to more readily hand out larger and larger repos for free.
Yes, because they wanted to try to keep GitHub as the default choice for developers to be hosting their repos. Hosting private repos will generally be a pretty small drain on their resources, and $7/month is a lot to ask just so people could keep a few personal projects non-public. That ended up with a lot of people (including me) just keeping their private repos on Bitbucket/GitLab instead, and only their public ones on GitHub. The risk there is that people will get used to the other sites too, and decide it's actually more convenient to just move everything over to the same one as their private repos.
Before September, GitLab had only taken $45M in VC, and GitHub $300M. So I certainly don't think it was about GitLab having more resources to be able to offer private repos.
GitLab made a very strange blog post in response to this, I'm not really sure what the intended purpose of it is: https://about.gitlab.com/2019/01/07/github-offering-free-private-repos-for-up-to-three-collaborators/
Looks like simple marketing to me. Users are hearing this news and was to see what the others offer and they will see this new blog post showing that gitlab still has a better free plan.
I feel like microsoft may be trying to tell me something between github + vs code + typescript + linux on azure.
Should I cancel my GitHub subscription then? Or rather, what else am I paying for? Because tbh that’s all I initially got it for.
The other differences are shown in the big chart at the bottom of https://github.com/pricing
There's not much, maybe the only other one that might be important at all is that you can only use Pages and Wikis on private repos with a paid subscription.
So something that you can still get on GitLab / Bitbucket for free? :/
Had they had this to begin with I wouldn't have switched over to GitLab, but now it's too late.