Hacker News Reader

Comment by eriknstr | Hacker News Reader

>this subtly piggy-backs on it towards lock-in for tooling

FTA: "More than a dozen integrators have apps in GitHub Marketplace today, including Travis CI, Appveyor, Waffle, ZenHub, Sentry, and Codacy"

Travis CI and many others were widespread prior to this marketplace. Seems to me that creating a marketplace is a logical way to collect these third-party services in one place.

View on HN

...and charge the going market rate of 30% of any revenue earned via the GitHub platform.

TravisCI Pro Bootstrap direct is $69: https://travis-ci.com/plans

TravisCI Pro Bootstrap via Github is $89: https://github.com/marketplace/travis-ci/plan/MDIyOk1hcmtldH...

any indication why the prices are different? it's not like they think we won't sniff that out, right?

That's an oversight on Github's part and will end in a TOS change in one of two directions: price parity or complete prohibition of paid services that use GH integrations outside of the marketplace

Ironic that the "hub for open-source projects" could become a walled garden if the latter happens.

> Ironic that the "hub for open-source projects" could become a walled garden if the latter happens.

I would say that the irony occurred when the "hub for open-source projects" is a closed-source platform.

(And I would say that as a paying user of Github that rather loves it.)

Irony is about intentions. Free-for-open is a marketing tactic, pure and simple.

It's different because GH take a cut of any sales via the Marketplace.

People already pay anywhere from 3-10x more for GH than for alternatives like BitBucket. I'm sure plenty will just click on 'buy'.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com