Nothing against GH per-se... we're paying customers and fairly happy with their service. But I still don't want to see their competition going away.
Nothing against GH per-se... we're paying customers and fairly happy with their service. But I still don't want to see their competition going away.
However, let's not fool ourselves: services like Codeplex, Google Code, or Sourceforge, that are not updated or providing new value, are going to be left behind and abandoned. In other words, their continued service wasn't providing any value, to their users or "competitors", because they weren't evolving.
I would rather people put their open source project on a code hosting service that is someone's priority, not just one that exists and is useless.
A `PushEvent` is fired for every open source repository that has `master` updated:
``` SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ( TABLE_DATE_RANGE([githubarchive:day.], TIMESTAMP('2017-03-01'), TIMESTAMP('2017-03-31') )) WHERE type = 'PushEvent' ```
It's over 19 million!
Make code reviews your number one priority. Be the place that people want to put their code in, because they can review code, significantly easier on your site, as opposed to GitHub's. Make management your number one priority. Be the place that can provide managers with code metrics and analytics, that GitHub can't. And so on.
To take mind share away from GitHub, you'll have to treat Git hosting, as a secondary thing. You can't be a derivative of GitHub and expect to compete, and succeed. Like Snapchat, Instagram (before acquisition) and others, you can only compete with Facebook, from a completely different angle.
If you can provide a novel solution, that cannot be easily duplicated by GitHub and others, getting users to store code with you, will be significantly easier. With GitLab, Gitea, Gogs, etc., Git hosting has turned into a commodity product, which means you'll need to focus on providing value based on the code stored and not the management of the code.
That seems to be Microsoft's approach with Visual Studio Team Services. Whereas Github seems to be focused on code, VSTS is more focused on integrating every step of software development, with version control, work item tracking, continuous integration, etc, all living in one integrated package. Now, this means that the version control aspect of it isn't as good as that of Github's. But, the issue tracking is far superior, and you don't really need to invest in learning separate software (like Travis or Jenkins, or what-have-you) in order to get continuous integration working.
This isn't really a high bar. Doing more than one iteration of code review with GitHub's tooling is a complete mess. In addition to that, both PR comments and Commit comments exist which can be extremely confusing if you do make one when you meant to make the other.
There is already other tooling which leverage GitHub's APIs to provide a nicer interface for code review.
GitHub provides a list: https://github.com/integrations/feature/code-review
I don't think that that is an exhaustive list; for instance GerritHub is missing (although I'm not a fan of it).
SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT repo.id) FROM [githubarchive:month.201701] WHERE type = 'PushEvent'
I got 1896676, so almost 2M distinct repos with commits in last January.
There's no ambiguity there. It's just how the language works.
"I saw that film last January."
"I saw that film in January."
As the other commenters have mentioned, "last January" may mean January 2016 for them, whereas for others it's 2017. The second example should be a definite 2017, except you always have your occasional smart alec [0].
I would disagree with jasonkester--there is ambiguity here.
_If_ "I saw that film in January", definitely means 2017, it requires quite deep semantics, as chancing it to "My birthday is in January" shows.
Tim: "It's a little known fact that Woodrow Wilson signed the Treaty of Versailles while ice skating on the royal pond." Bob: "That's clearly nonsense. The Treaty of Versailles was signed in June."
It would be very different to say, "the Treaty of Versailles was signed last June." That would imply it was signed in June 2016, rather than June 1919.
What about 'this past', is that used to refer to the latest instance or is that also last complete cycle?
I would interpret "this past" as most recent thing from the current. So "this past January" would, to me, sound like the most recent January (Jan 2017)
Neither offered much that couldn't be provided with barebones cheap hosting and a Gitlab install, and my impression as an outsider was thatneither really improved over time.
TBH, GitHub and BitBucket may not offer too much over GitLab any more either, but they are at least improving their products all the time and there's a sort of trendy network effect in using them that didn't exist for CodePlex or Google Code.
However, Google Cloud Platform does have private repositories that can also be used in their CI/CD solution.
Shame if you happen to live in the path of the juggernaut however...
I wonder how they might better monetize without becoming obnoxious?
Also, it supported many code source systems, not just git. GitHub only added SVN support recently.
They do seem to actually care about the two properties.
Supposedly there's a big redesign of SF in the pipeline, and more importantly, the first thing they did when they took over was cancel that malware hijack monetization bullshit which the previous owners had embarked upon. They scan for malware now too apparently, added 2FA and are offering HTTPS downloads. Regaining trust is an uphill battle, but they're giving it a damn good go.
Searching HN to see if he'd done similar to his AMA-type thing on /r/sysadmin[2], it's sad to see their blogposts have been posted and got no love. I didn't even know SF had a blog, and it seems to have some cool content.
(He didn't do an AMA-style post here, probably wise, but the Reddit post was submitted here and he showed up in the comments [3]).
[1] https://www.reddit.com/user/loganabbott [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4n3e1s/the_state_... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11860752
Unfortunately, there seems to be the same thing happening with GitHub - at least from a layperson's perspective. (same thing meaning that github has extraordinary mindshare in the open source community)
Personally, I'm usually surprised when I encounter an opensource project that is not hosted on github. There are plenty of other options, but github has entirely too much mindshare to be safe. The people currently managing it have proven trustworthy, and git's architecture makes it easier to migrate should that change in the future. But even if it's easy there is a cost in lost supporting data.
Developers need to support other tools so that the big dogs have a reason to play nice through takeovers or changing business climates.
I hope that Gitlab continues to grow. And I'd love to see at least one other VCS grow their footprint. Competition is good. Git and github are not without problems, even if they are the preferred option at the moment. The more competition there is, the more pressure they have to improve.
<ironic I have a strong opinion considering I spent exactly $0 on version control in the last 6 months>
Reddit AMA: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4n3e1s/the_state_...
It will be interesting to see what their big redesign is.
I only ever looked briefly at CodePlex (I'm not involved in any MS developer communities, so it wasn't really my scene), but it didn't seem competitive with Github in terms of how much you can do with very low friction. Likewise, I don't miss Google Code. It just wasn't good enough for me to want to use it...even Googlers didn't want to use it, and used Github more often.
And, there's some high quality open source options, as well, for self-hosted. I've tinkered with Gogs, and it's really very solid (if light on features compared to Github or Gitlab). And, of course, Gitlab has a very competent OSS offering.
Things seem pretty good right now. Not a lot of risk of ending up locked into one vendor that goes rogue. I mean, I worry about some projects really going all-in on github, like their dependencies and such are based on github URLS (that seems crazy on numerous fronts!). But, there are escape routes to many good competitors in the space.
This.Competition is good. The less competition, the less insentive Github will have to improve their product.
But Microsoft didn't put a lot of effort into making CodePlex user friendly either (just like google code back then). What makes Github great is that it is fairly easy to get started with, fairly easy to use and to navigate.