105
GitHub faces a fight for its survival at Microsoft (www.theverge.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/programming@programming.dev
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 58 points 4 months ago (12 children)

If only there were better, open-source, self-hostable alternatives... Wait, there are!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Oh common it's not like there's an org for mountains of code. A codeberg.org basically.

    Or a method to forge jo own code repos just like that, just for dev. A ... forgejo.dev ... No that would be crazy. Let's rather stick with Microsoft - after all, nothing they ever touched was bad for their user base, ever.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Forge federation can't come soon enough. I love being able to host my own little projects on my own forge, but if anyone intended to open an issue or PR, they would currently need an account on my instance to do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Heck every conference I go to I pester Gitlab about it. It's always "ehh it's on the road map". Honestly it really is the solution to that problem space

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Why would GitLab care!?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Because the network effect is the primary reason GitHub is the defacto forge. There some pretty large FOSS orgs on gitlab though, but it's inherently splintered without federation.

    From an enterprise standpoint, there are a surprising amount of organizations so big they have several gitlabs running, but tons of friction again because of the splintered nature that takes up.

    They did care, then AI became the time sink.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Codeberg is great, but let's not pretend that it's a replacement for GitHub. Notably they don't allow private repos and can't offer free CI (not in the same way as GitHub anyway). Plus, I don't see how they would be immune to the slopnami either if they became popular.

    Best case would be if GitHub survives and just improves their reliability. I would not be surprised if they start imposing some kind of stricter limits on free accounts though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    I fundamentally disagree on your conclusion.

    Codeberg is a non profit under German law. There won't be openai "non profit but not really" bullshit.

    And your point about CI Integration ins good example: There is no "free" CI. GitHub lets you pay with their vendor lock-in and your data.

    If that's okay with you, that's okay with me - but as a programming community as a whole ,especially FOSS side, this needs to go away.

    The best case for me is that GitHub dies and its death is a wake-up call to decouple collaboration layers in a way that keeps them modular enough to not again rub into "too big or integrated to fail".

    And yes, I'm aware that this is 2/3 day dreaming. But that's my best case association anyway :D

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    GitHub lets you pay with their vendor lock-in and your data.

    What vendor lock-in? GitHub barely has any.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    That's fair it has loss leaders and network effects more so. The vendor lock in is non-git, non-ci side. So issues, orgs, etc. Actually you can see where they embraced opensource vs extending solely by the degree it is vendor locked.

    If they stole it, it's a loss leader, if they made it, it's vendor locked.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    Yeah I would say issues are minimal lock-in since they barely have any features (just labels I guess?) and can easily be exported. CI must be the biggest lock-in. If you have a complex CI system that makes use of lots of third party actions it could be a decent amount of work to migrate it. But not a huge amount.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent