Why I no longer use GitHub (2018)
wowana.me
wowana.me
Also of note: github blocks indie search crawlers, contributing to search engine monoculture. Moreover, your user's clicks are captured by a company with an incentive to push for privacy invasion as a business model going forward. So, indeed, F/OSS projects using gh should definitely reconsider, if they haven't already done so when MS bought gh.
If I want to run a FOSS project, I might not be interested in the details of managing distribution and security of some server (one-click software rather than setting up some server myself)
I also .... kinda don’t care about account management (=> using something that people already use is nice)
Peer to peer isn’t actually interesting for almost any aspect of a project. The main advantage is availability, but it doesn’t help (and can hinder) other objectives of running a FOSS project.
I think that there’s a way to get most of the goodies (see GitLab... kinda), though it’s a hell of a lot more work than “just send email patches around!” I think sourcehut is getting there though
Pirate Bay for torrents, Napster, GitHub for git, ... They do fix a problem.
I actually think that Microsoft is the lesser evil in this case. They will add azure flows, but not enforce them. I believe they will also embrace other services ( not the embrace and extend way though. The Enterprise culture makes them support things for a very long term ( even codeplex still let's you download old archives)
They reinvented themselves with the mantra: developers.
Making them pissed off for using something else is not their mantra any more ( them = developers outside the dot Net/ windows ecosystem)
And yes, as each business, they also want profits. But the way to do it has changed.
Ps. Google code also let's you download the old repos ( just checked it)
Edit 2: the only thing I can think of is that the evolution of Windows forms didn't go as planned and got changed to "more web". As a result, WPF ( I think) is in maintenance mode and considered as feature complete untill it's fully integrated in. Net core ( which was a hard change because of differences in graphic rendering cross platform). The only thing that got deprecated here was Silverlight, which was a correct and hard decision.
https://drone.io is open-source and works very well.
I personally can't stand Gitlab's interface and general slowness.
sh.rt (which kind of became https://sourcehut.org) looks much better but it looks like you need to be logged in to see most of the content.
About abuse on Github, I only had issues with posting email addresses in public gists (even if they are public ones), and saw repo owners editing other people's comments, which should not be a thing.
About Github's source code, it's not open-source but you can host it with Github Enterprise and actually look at the source code (it's a very simple encryption of the source code as far as I remember).
Anyway, since Microsoft's acquisition of Github I started to worry of the general direction Github is going to but so far they haven't messed up too much IMHO.
We are heavily focusing on performance improvements - both in the product (so that features run better)[1] and in our GitLab.com infrastructure (so that GitLab.com runs more reliably)[2].
[1] - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests?label...
> GitHub is not FOSS. Gitlab is.
Firstly, I don't think it is hypocritical to run a service that isn't FOSS, but that also supports FOSS. Secondly, nobody is under the illusion that Github is open source. Thirdly, Gitlab is only partly open source. Many of its features aren't.
> Github pull requests suck, why not just use email?
Maybe because email doesn't: a) Give you a convenient list of open pull requests, b) Give you a list of pull requests that other people can see at all c) Let you do nice line-by-line code reviews, d) Let you integrate CI tools easily, etc. etc. etc.
> You can't host malware on Github
Ok?
> I set up gitolite for repository access control, cgit for a simple Web frontend, and I plan to include an issue tracker that treats E-mail as first-class rather than forcing users to create accounts (possibly Bugzilla but I'm open to suggestions)
Riiiight. I'm sure everyone will love going back to the good old days of Bugzilla.
We are an open core company. We ship two editions - Community Edition and Enterprise Edition. CE is completely open source and licensed under MIT license. EE is proprietary, closed source code but we try to work in a way similar to GitLab CE: the issue tracker is publicly viewable and the EE license allows modifications.
In conclusion (TLDR), GitLab has an open core business model and ships both open and closed source software.
That maintenance lack for the open source users and the lack of new really relevant features.
Additionally, there is nothing wrong with implementing a better version of what the competition offers.
GitLab.com was originally announced with free private repos. When you’re starting to program and aren't ready to share your code with the world yet, you don't have to have a paid account to keep it private.
Now, we're focusing on making a single application for the entire DevOps lifecycle that can replace a lot of other tools[1]. So instead of a version control system that lets people try out different integrations, GitLab provides an opinionated (yet flexible with key integrations and the option to opt out of anything you don't want) way to run the entire software development and deployment lifecycle.
Or, as Stavros Korokithakis phrased it: "My move to GitLab was basically 'Come for the free repos, stay for the rest of the amazing features.' I will not be moving off it, and my new repos will keep being on GitLab."
Fact is GitHub is the site that won this winner take all race. If you put your open source project anywhere else you do your project and it’s users a disservice. Everyone knows and is familiar with github and uses it every day ... taking your project elsewhere takes it out of this daily workflow.
And frankly who cares if GitHub itself is not open source... honestly it really doesn’t matter in any meaningful practical way, it matters only from an ideological standpoint.
I like it that the modern world of OSS isn’t controlled by the extreme ideology because these people tend to choose worse options to get the job done because that worse option meets an ideological position.
Later, when the company is fully grown, customers are locked-in, and investors want to cash out, the commercial option often becomes the worse option.
I dislike it for the very same reason. A blind pragmaticism leads to a worse world for everybody. I would prefer if developers were more conscious (and yes, ideological) of their fundamental role in the future of general-purpose computing.