6 ms·

These are great, but they're bugfixes. You'd finish them in the first few months. Then what are you going to do? Stare at an aquarium all day? Here's what I

These are great, but they're bugfixes. You'd finish them in the first few months. Then what are you going to do? Stare at an aquarium all day? Here's what I would build if I worked at github: * Github CI - simple CI for every language, integrating with: * Github Artifacts - repository for versioned deployable build packages (binaries, tar.gz files, ios builds, android builds...), integrating with: * Github Deploy - deploy tooling for deploying runnable artifacts or artifact combinations to either your own infrastructure, or to aws/azure/google, or: * Github Cloud - instances/containers as a service and the 'fork' button would be a pulldown that would include the options 'fork', 'fork and test', 'fork, test and deploy'. Now that's a nice little 3-4 year career.

holic 11y ago
Maybe a more apt title would be "Things I would fix if I worked at GitHub". :)
jxm262 11y ago
A github CI would be awesome! I imagine it would get very costly for them though. I love Travis-CI and the easy integration, but it's too expensive for my non-open source projects.
- sytse 11y ago
  GitHub CI might happen sooner rather than later https://twitter.com/j2h/status/627114183621013504 https://twitter.com/j2h/status/627114183621013504 Anyway, if you want it today consider using our GitLab CI https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-ci/ https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-ci/ it is free if you bring your own runner.
vezzy-fnord 11y ago
I can't tell if there was a satirical subtext about aggressive expansion in this post, what with "Now that's a nice little 3-4 year career."
panic 11y ago
You'd finish them in the first few months. I bet you could work on small polish issues like this for a lifetime and never finish. There's always something to improve.
- pg_is_a_butt 11y ago
  i bet employers love listening to your bullshit excuses
sinnet11 11y ago
These are great, but they're bugfixes. You'd finish them in the first few months. Then what are you going to do? Stare at an aquarium all day? Bugfixes are not feature enhancements. Also this makes you sound like a pleasant person to work with.....a real go getter.
kelukelugames 11y ago
What is CI and why do people want it? I looked up the acronym on wikipedia but couldn't figure it out.
- davidcelis 11y ago
  Continuous Integration. A good example of that service would be something like http://travis-ci.org http://travis-ci.org or https://jenkins-ci.org https://jenkins-ci.org. Basically it's a service that runs some predefined task (usually your test suites) at important points: when something is pushed to or merged into master, when a Pull Request is opened, etc...
  - pimlottc 11y ago
    It also, um, builds your code. Some of us still use compiled languages :P
- trusche 11y ago
  Continuous Integration (testing)
- tacone 11y ago
  It stands for continuous integration.
scrollaway 11y ago
Of all the things I wish Github had, a mailing list service would be really amazing, and the kind of thing that wouldn't be done in the first few months. Sourceforge offers atrocious mailman-based email, larger foss projects on github suffer :(
- z1mm32m4n 11y ago
  What appeals to you about mailing lists? If it's reporting issues, discussion solutions, and reviewing patches, there are Issues and Pull Requests. If it's for general discussions about the "future of the project" or bigger-picture topics, I'd use Discourse. It's a really nice way to organize discussions that are one step removed from code-related issues. If it's for things where you need quick or real time feedback, there's IRC, Gitter, and Slack, all great options for messaging/chat.
  - scrollaway 11y ago
    > If it's for general discussions about the "future of the project" or bigger-picture topics, I'd use Discourse. It's a really nice way to organize discussions that are one step removed from code-related issues. This is what is appealing and Github offering a builtin-to-github solution for it, with linking to Github accounts, autoformatting etc (like in issues) and so on. There is so much potential.
    - dvanduzer 11y ago
      Why can't you just have those discussions in issues? Create a "future of the project" label.
      - scrollaway 11y ago
        Because then users can't simply send an email to create a new topic to talk about...
        zeckalpha 11y ago
fideloper 11y ago
GitHub CI and artifacts are great ideas. Owning the chain of Dev - test - deploy would be a superb move, one worth paying for!
critiq 11y ago
I think I am happy that git hub not doing any of this. If they do everything * they may have affinity towards their stack. * excel on none. * lock in
Eiriksmal 11y ago
Great minds... I was talking about this the other day with the other engineers at work, after learning about GitHub's most recent monstrous funding round. It seems like CI/a deployment service and something that competes in the crowded PaaS field is the next logical step. AWS enables us to do some pretty slick things, but OpsWorks is a giant bag of suck that frequently finds a way to drain my time troubleshooting why something crazy or random has happened on the production server--behaviors I never saw in my previous role running a bare-metal LAMP stack for 4 years. A tighter integration between our GitHub repo and a testing/build server... Swoon.
onli 11y ago
Non of the items in the author's list is a bugfix. They all are enhancements. A bugfix would fix a bug, which means something would not work as it is supposed to, fail, and that is not the case here. Arguing semantics, maybe. But I think it is important to distinguish here. Polishing issues or enhancements or whatever you call it are things that do not need to be adressed, but they can. But bugs needs to be fixed. Choosing between what to do now is choosing between maintenance work and feature enhancement work, plumbing and UX. I think it would be great if Github would hire and let him build these things, does not matter if he finishes in a month.
kolev 11y ago
All these are nice, but are not must-haves as they can be built outside of GitHub. The show-stopper for me is granular permissions - coming from the Gitolite [0] world, where I can permission even branches and do all kinds of checks and balances on the server, GitHub is a joke for a not-so-large enterprise! Another thing is the Wiki - why pages are based on Git and the Wiki is not?! [0] http://gitolite.com/ http://gitolite.com/
h43k3r 11y ago
Exactly my thoughts. After exploring Visual Studio Online (its free for 5 users), I am still not able to digest why there isn't a build and deploy system in GitHub. There were great demos at Microsoft's BUILD15 for Automated Build and Release Management which demonstrates these features.

holic 11y ago

Maybe a more apt title would be "Things I would fix if I worked at GitHub". :)

jxm262 11y ago

A github CI would be awesome! I imagine it would get very costly for them though. I love Travis-CI and the easy integration, but it's too expensive for my non-open source projects.

sytse 11y ago
GitHub CI might happen sooner rather than later https://twitter.com/j2h/status/627114183621013504 https://twitter.com/j2h/status/627114183621013504 Anyway, if you want it today consider using our GitLab CI https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-ci/ https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-ci/ it is free if you bring your own runner.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

I can't tell if there was a satirical subtext about aggressive expansion in this post, what with "Now that's a nice little 3-4 year career."

panic 11y ago

You'd finish them in the first few months. I bet you could work on small polish issues like this for a lifetime and never finish. There's always something to improve.

pg_is_a_butt 11y ago
i bet employers love listening to your bullshit excuses

sinnet11 11y ago

These are great, but they're bugfixes. You'd finish them in the first few months. Then what are you going to do? Stare at an aquarium all day? Bugfixes are not feature enhancements. Also this makes you sound like a pleasant person to work with.....a real go getter.

kelukelugames 11y ago

What is CI and why do people want it? I looked up the acronym on wikipedia but couldn't figure it out.

davidcelis 11y ago
Continuous Integration. A good example of that service would be something like http://travis-ci.org http://travis-ci.org or https://jenkins-ci.org https://jenkins-ci.org. Basically it's a service that runs some predefined task (usually your test suites) at important points: when something is pushed to or merged into master, when a Pull Request is opened, etc...
- pimlottc 11y ago
  It also, um, builds your code. Some of us still use compiled languages :P
trusche 11y ago
Continuous Integration (testing)
tacone 11y ago
It stands for continuous integration.

scrollaway 11y ago

Of all the things I wish Github had, a mailing list service would be really amazing, and the kind of thing that wouldn't be done in the first few months. Sourceforge offers atrocious mailman-based email, larger foss projects on github suffer :(

z1mm32m4n 11y ago
What appeals to you about mailing lists? If it's reporting issues, discussion solutions, and reviewing patches, there are Issues and Pull Requests. If it's for general discussions about the "future of the project" or bigger-picture topics, I'd use Discourse. It's a really nice way to organize discussions that are one step removed from code-related issues. If it's for things where you need quick or real time feedback, there's IRC, Gitter, and Slack, all great options for messaging/chat.
- scrollaway 11y ago
  > If it's for general discussions about the "future of the project" or bigger-picture topics, I'd use Discourse. It's a really nice way to organize discussions that are one step removed from code-related issues. This is what is appealing and Github offering a builtin-to-github solution for it, with linking to Github accounts, autoformatting etc (like in issues) and so on. There is so much potential.
  - dvanduzer 11y ago
    Why can't you just have those discussions in issues? Create a "future of the project" label.
    - scrollaway 11y ago
      Because then users can't simply send an email to create a new topic to talk about...
      - zeckalpha 11y ago

fideloper 11y ago

GitHub CI and artifacts are great ideas. Owning the chain of Dev - test - deploy would be a superb move, one worth paying for!

critiq 11y ago

I think I am happy that git hub not doing any of this. If they do everything * they may have affinity towards their stack. * excel on none. * lock in

Eiriksmal 11y ago

Great minds... I was talking about this the other day with the other engineers at work, after learning about GitHub's most recent monstrous funding round. It seems like CI/a deployment service and something that competes in the crowded PaaS field is the next logical step. AWS enables us to do some pretty slick things, but OpsWorks is a giant bag of suck that frequently finds a way to drain my time troubleshooting why something crazy or random has happened on the production server--behaviors I never saw in my previous role running a bare-metal LAMP stack for 4 years. A tighter integration between our GitHub repo and a testing/build server... Swoon.

onli 11y ago

Non of the items in the author's list is a bugfix. They all are enhancements. A bugfix would fix a bug, which means something would not work as it is supposed to, fail, and that is not the case here. Arguing semantics, maybe. But I think it is important to distinguish here. Polishing issues or enhancements or whatever you call it are things that do not need to be adressed, but they can. But bugs needs to be fixed. Choosing between what to do now is choosing between maintenance work and feature enhancement work, plumbing and UX. I think it would be great if Github would hire and let him build these things, does not matter if he finishes in a month.

kolev 11y ago

All these are nice, but are not must-haves as they can be built outside of GitHub. The show-stopper for me is granular permissions - coming from the Gitolite [0] world, where I can permission even branches and do all kinds of checks and balances on the server, GitHub is a joke for a not-so-large enterprise! Another thing is the Wiki - why pages are based on Git and the Wiki is not?! [0] http://gitolite.com/ http://gitolite.com/

h43k3r 11y ago

Exactly my thoughts. After exploring Visual Studio Online (its free for 5 users), I am still not able to digest why there isn't a build and deploy system in GitHub. There were great demos at Microsoft's BUILD15 for Automated Build and Release Management which demonstrates these features.