6 ms·

> he makes a lot of points that GitHub is particularly awful at, specifically things that aren't very relevant to enterprises (who pay their bills) and therefor

> he makes a lot of points that GitHub is particularly awful at, specifically things that aren't very relevant to enterprises (who pay their bills) and therefore aren't priorities for GitHub. As someone who has managed teams at such enterprises that have used GitHub (and pay handsomely for it), I can confess that it is indeed an enterprise problem too. Everywhere I've worked with a team of > 10 people is paying for something other than GitHub to track issues because this solution is unworkable.

jsmeaton 11y ago
I think you're agreeing with the comment indirectly. I think the point was that enterprises are likely to pay for a different issues system, which isn't really a possibility for an open source project. OSS projects can use a different issue system, but they're unlikely to pay for one.
- luckydata 11y ago
  they can just request a bunch of licenses from Atlassian, they provide free software for open source projects. https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request/ https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license...
pluma 11y ago
If you're only using GitHub for version control, is there any particular reason you aren't using something else like GitLab? Is it integration with third party products?
- pluma 11y ago
  Not sure why I get downvoted. I'm genuinely interested in an opinion. I've repeatedly evaluated GitHub and its competitors for various non-open-source projects and the costs simply never justified using it.
  - jacalata 11y ago
    People discuss the drawbacks of moving off github in the linked discussion. The big one seems to be visibility.
    - pluma 11y ago
      The linked discussion is about an open source project. The GP was talking about (what sounds like) closed source projects. The requirements are very different, hence the question.
- glenngillen 11y ago
  Probably a number of reasons: * Inertia. GitHub is mostly good enough most of the time. Actually in many areas it's actually downright fantastic. The few really rough areas aren't enough to justify throwing everything else away. * Trust & Stability. They've done a great job of cementing their credibility when it comes to taking uptime, performance, and security seriously. * Design. GitLab in particular still looks like a cheap knock-off. Having worked a number of years for a company that cares about design I've come to appreciate that the lack of attention to detail in things like this. * Insufficient appeal elsewhere. No alternatives clearly do everything I currently do + the things I want an order of magnitude better to justify a switching cost. The alternatives last time I looked largely appear to have some feature parity, some bits missing, the occasional thing better. It nets out at same same.

jsmeaton 11y ago

I think you're agreeing with the comment indirectly. I think the point was that enterprises are likely to pay for a different issues system, which isn't really a possibility for an open source project. OSS projects can use a different issue system, but they're unlikely to pay for one.

luckydata 11y ago
they can just request a bunch of licenses from Atlassian, they provide free software for open source projects. https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request/ https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license...

pluma 11y ago

If you're only using GitHub for version control, is there any particular reason you aren't using something else like GitLab? Is it integration with third party products?

pluma 11y ago
Not sure why I get downvoted. I'm genuinely interested in an opinion. I've repeatedly evaluated GitHub and its competitors for various non-open-source projects and the costs simply never justified using it.
- jacalata 11y ago
  People discuss the drawbacks of moving off github in the linked discussion. The big one seems to be visibility.
  - pluma 11y ago
    The linked discussion is about an open source project. The GP was talking about (what sounds like) closed source projects. The requirements are very different, hence the question.
glenngillen 11y ago
Probably a number of reasons: * Inertia. GitHub is mostly good enough most of the time. Actually in many areas it's actually downright fantastic. The few really rough areas aren't enough to justify throwing everything else away. * Trust & Stability. They've done a great job of cementing their credibility when it comes to taking uptime, performance, and security seriously. * Design. GitLab in particular still looks like a cheap knock-off. Having worked a number of years for a company that cares about design I've come to appreciate that the lack of attention to detail in things like this. * Insufficient appeal elsewhere. No alternatives clearly do everything I currently do + the things I want an order of magnitude better to justify a switching cost. The alternatives last time I looked largely appear to have some feature parity, some bits missing, the occasional thing better. It nets out at same same.