45 ms·

Announcing new tools, forums, and features

1142 points by joshmanders 10y ago

source99 10y ago
Link goes right to 404 - Thats one heck of a new feature.
- homeyer 10y ago
  Heh, 404s if you aren't logged in to GitHub
  - source99 10y ago
    Nope. I was logged in. Guessing it was something else. I like how I got downvoted for providing information...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
huac 10y ago
Definitely cool, but weren't you always able to comment inline on a PR?
- Arnavion 10y ago
  The GIF shows "Start Review" button and "Finish your review" buttons (and a "Pending" flag), which makes me think this is more geared to the complaints that every comment sent an individual email instead of being batched when the reviewer was ready to send them out. Edit: Indeed, from the github blog post - "You can also leave a review summary and delete, edit, or bundle comments before you submit them."
Arnavion 10y ago
1st party link: https://github.com/blog/2256-a-whole-new-github-universe-announcing-new-tools-forums-and-features https://github.com/blog/2256-a-whole-new-github-universe-ann...
- joshmanders 10y ago
  Can we get this updated to this? defunkt didn't post this blog post before TechCrunch talked about it. I'd much rather had linked to it.
  - sctb 10y ago
    OK, we've updated the link from https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/14/github-gets-built-in-project-management-tools-and-support-for-reviews/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/14/github-gets-built-in-proje....
    - joshmanders 10y ago
      Thank you! I haven't said it lately, but the team behind this community is great. Quickly becoming my favorite forum.
stevejohnson 10y ago
Missed opportunity to call the platform forum the "GitHub PlatForum."
- nchelluri 10y ago
  I'm not sure "missed opportunity" is the right name for that :)
Hovertruck 10y ago
Batch review has been my #1 most desired feature for Github for many years now. This is great!
- rsanheim 10y ago
  Thanks! It has been on our list for a long time as well, excited to get it shipped.
bsimpson 10y ago
I'll be curious to see if they've made API granularity more sane. We haven't been able to use any third party tools because our security people don't feel great about giving third parties write access to everything (including our source) for tools that don't need it. In the past, GitHub hasn't differentiated write access to issues (which many tools need) and write access to the source itself (which basically nothing should need).
- bhuga 10y ago
  This is an important part of the new integrations early access program: https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-09-14-Integrations-Early-Access/ https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-09-14-Integrations...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- web007 10y ago
  Plus a million - I'm not sure how this still isn't a feature. Considering all of the PCI-DSS / HIPAA / SOX / etc. audit points around change control (even ignoring corporate versions of the same) it's practically impossible to add external services to GH and have them be useful while still meeting compliance. Change control is required, but that also implies control of change control. As-is any service could delete all of your content, whether intentionally or inadvertently, or even worse could corrupt or otherwise alter your history. It may be detectable and recoverable because git, but it would be infinitely easier to have code and PR be r--rw-. EDIT: This is now a thing, according to @bhuga below. Also, GH is now publishing a roadmap for what's coming down the pipe, so we're not in the dark as to when these critically-important-why-isnt-it-out-yet features are being worked on. https://developer.github.com/early-access/platform-roadmap/ https://developer.github.com/early-access/platform-roadmap/
- welder 10y ago
  WakaTime has been bitten by this lack of granularity too... it hurts integration usage when we ask for code access when we only need commit log messages.
- 10y ago
scrollaway 10y ago
Impressive. I have to think that this is all competition fostered by Gitlab - all those features were present in Gitlab. Competition at work :)
- imsodrunklol 10y ago
  I have been a huge pusher for GitLab, and my basic reasoning was that GitHub isn't open sourced like GitLab. GitHub was going awfully slow and no communication to its customers in new features. Looks like GitLab lit a fire underneath them. I wonder which one is "better". Nevertheless, at least there is competition now. SCM is the biggest component in any coding practices, I'm that it is finally getting attention.
  - midwestcode 10y ago
    Hopefully the community forum will help GitHub to keep in touch with the community!
deathanatos 10y ago
I sent this to support, but the "Files changed" tab in Pull Requests now has an announcement "We've made some change to reviewing code" The "Learn more" button on that banner is a broken link… (It's a good thing this HN post later directed me to the blog post, as now I've learned from that.)
- moby 10y ago
  Sorry about that! Is the link working now?
  - deathanatos 10y ago
    Looks like it is! (The URL that was broken now has content; the banner has since vanished for me.)
    - moby 10y ago
      Excellent. :)
BinaryIdiot 10y ago
The review stuff is semi similar to what I requested GitLab do and I'm surprised it's taken so long for anyone to really do it. It's a great workflow. I'm still not convinced about keeping all of your project's management in the version control system (I mean I prefer issues in there but the rest seems...wrong to me for whatever biased reason I have). Overall looks good! When does Enterprise get these features? :)
- moby 10y ago
  We're glad you like it! This is the first of many Code Review enhancements we'll be providing, so stay tuned. These features will be coming to GitHub Enterprise soon - we always aim to get new features onto the Enterprise platform on the next major release (which occurs every 3 months on average).
- Nimimi 10y ago
  Phabricator and Gerrit had this for ages!
- majewsky 10y ago
  The review stuff actually reminded me of http://review.ninja http://review.ninja, which has existed for at least 1.5 years at this point.
dblooman 10y ago
Wonder how services like Waffle will react to this
- homeyer 10y ago
  http://blog.waffle.io/say-hello-to-wafflebot/ http://blog.waffle.io/say-hello-to-wafflebot/
bowmessage 10y ago
Is this the death of Trello?
- toddsiegel 10y ago
  Lots of non-devs use Trello. Trello also has lot of features this does not, but I can see GH users using Trello jumping to this, like me.
- jglovier 10y ago
  Very unlikely. We hope that Projects will be the best place for people to coordinate work on a GitHub repository, but that doesn't really limit Trello's value much. They'll continue to offer lots of value as a great way to coordinate work for many contexts outside GitHub repositories.
- eyelidlessness 10y ago
  I'd switch instantly if: 1. There was a faster and more contextual way to edit issues on a project. 2. There was a way to set up an opinionated workflow where e.g. opening a PR against an issue moves the issue to "Review"; closing said PR moves issue to "Done" and closes it; closing an issue directly moves it to "Done" and vice versa. Without this, there's way too much interaction required for even GitHub's own preferred workflow. 3. Automatic bidirectional linking between issue/PR on the project board. (Honestly haven't had a chance to see if it does this, but will on the next PR I open.) 4. Automatically pre-fill a backlog with existing issues. 5. A project could span multiple repositories (e.g. for tracking user stories which might be addressed in an API or frontend repo, or both). We also track non-dev work on our Trello board, and a project per repo doesn't support this. 6. Filtering. Edit... Also nice to have: ability to reference a checklist item in a link from PR to issue, check it on merge, and so on.
  - mr_november 10y ago
    Hi - Codetree [1] does a lot of what you're asking for (specifically 3, 5, 6) and I love the other stuff you mention, we've been thinking hard on a couple of them. Would love to quickly chat about your workflow just to learn, not to sell, if you can spare the 15 mins. If you're interested shoot me an email at arif@codetree.com. [1] https://codetree.com https://codetree.com
sgarrity 10y ago
Some nice improvements here. It appears, though, that Projects suffer from the same problem we've had with Issues: they are limited to one repo. I know there are some tools to manage Issues across repos, but for the most part, the tools seem to assume you work on only one repo, or that milestones only affect a single repo. I would love to see projects/milestones become more capable when dealing with cross-repo issues.
- rohamg 10y ago
  Take a look at ZenHub [1] - it lets you stay inside GitHub, but adds much more full-featured project management capabilities including multi-repo boards and advanced reporting features like estimates, issue hierarchy (epics), personal to-dos, burndown and velocity charts, etc. [1] https://www.zenhub.com https://www.zenhub.com
- ajsharma 10y ago
  At Goldbely, our solution has been to have a single GitHub repo that's just for issues and use tags to highlight the actual code repos involved. Works pretty well, if a little awkward at first.
  - elwell 10y ago
    We do this as well at Purple [0]. It does make issue referencing in commit messages a bit unwieldy; you have to include the full path to the issue (e.g., org-name/repo-name#34). [0] - http://purpleapp.com http://purpleapp.com
- scrollaway 10y ago
  Yup! Using Projects will force us to maintain multiple projects for one single "real" project, as our code is split across multiple repositories. (Web app, desktop client, infrastructure, company issues, etc) I suspect it's still a lot better than the alternative but not having org-wide Projects is a little sad.
- rogerbinns 10y ago
  This has been why we don't use github's issues, wikis, and why we won't use their projects. For example if the overall product has a web site repo, server repo, iOS repo and an Android repo then they need to be used as a coherent whole. An issue might be reported against iOS but the cause is in the server, so the ticket would need to be moved. Rinse and repeat for all the other interactions of piece, and that collaborators often don't know (and shouldn't need to) precisely what issues, wikis etc correspond to which repo. The now defunct Google Code had a very good solution for this. You could create additional "sub" repositories alongside the "main" one. Github already does that for the wiki, but doesn't generalise it to allowing additional ones. I'm somewhat convinced this is because github has the whole "charge by the repository" model, which is at odds for being useful for projects that require multiple git level repos.
captn3m0 10y ago
This is a rough summary of what all I read in the blog post: 1. projects. replaces trello, waffle.io, zenhub and many other similar services. 2. code reviews allow approval/request changes as sunny's screenshot shows 3. reviews can be made mandatory. 4. github platform integrations is getting a roadmap 5. a graphql api to query their database 6. enforce 2fa in organizations (much love for this one) 7. summarized timeline for your contibutions Just a few days back, at the GitLab release, I'd noticed a lot of complains about gitlab releasing useful and impactful features and github being slow on releases. Moreover, now with a public roadmap (even if it is just for platforms), it is a great start. I'm really liking this change in pace. mods: Can we make this the canonical discussion for this topic? Otherwise, a lot of branching will happen
- thegarside 10y ago
  Doesn't look like Projects comes close to replacing ZenHub / Waffle.. Not for proper teams anyway – real project management needs to be much more robust so I'm keeping ZenHub for now.
- jglovier 10y ago
  >projects. replaces trello, waffle.io, zenhub and many other similar services. This is really not about replacing those services, it's more about building a better foundation for integrators like Waffle and ZenHub to build on.
  - captn3m0 10y ago
    I'm looking at https://www.zenhub.com/product https://www.zenhub.com/product, and while it does have some extra features (filters on priority, labels), but for most people the base set provided by github is gonna be sufficient. Sure, it won't completely replace them, but GitHub building this as a platform counts as competition.
    - ma138 10y ago
      Using ZenHub also provides additional features like time estimation, burndown charts and Epics (for issue hierarchy) - we find that for larger teams, these are must-have features to work inside GitHub.
vcarl 10y ago
The improvements to code reviews are really exciting. Having comments submit all at once instead of one at a time is a great UX change, I've definitely gotten sidetracked mid-review because somebody started responding to my initial comments when I'm neck deep. Comment threading is super useful for discussion-heavy comments like code review, and an in-UI approve/request changes is great.
- moby 10y ago
  That's awesome to hear - we're glad you like those changes! As you dive into it further, let us know how it works for you.
hannob 10y ago
And still no HTTPS for github pages with custom domains...
- dorianm 10y ago
  You can use Cloudflare for that. (That's what I do on https://doma.io https://doma.io)
avitzurel 10y ago
Batched review and pending state have both been a long time coming. Most of the times when I do a review it's not a single comment and right now the workflow is to let the team know on Slack that I am reviewing this. From the Gif it's not 100% clear what the pending state does but I would want something like blocking the PR until every team member that started reviewing will "release" the PR. I also see the negative side of this of course but I think the positive outweighs the negatives.
- mwarkentin 10y ago
  You can block merges until there's an "approved" code review in the Protected Branches setting. I don't think it has anything like "everyone who reviewed must approve" though.
toddsiegel 10y ago
If anyone from Github reads this, a) this looks great, b) add project templates please, so we don't have to recreate the same columns every time. Thanks. <3
- jglovier 10y ago
  Great idea. Thanks!
  - toddsiegel 10y ago
    While I have your attention. A few thoughts on code reviews. It's be nice if 1) approvals somehow show up on the pull requests index page, 2) create a notification within GH, 3) send an email. Right now you have to go to the PR page itself to see approvals. Edit: I saw an approval email notification on one PR, but not another. Thanks!
    - rsanheim 10y ago
      All reviews definitely generate notifications. We definitely want to get some way to surface reviews better across all PR's and/or projects. I've been bothered by that myself while we were building this. :)
    - reustle 10y ago
      +1 for seeing approvals visually on the pull request index page. I currently use a "Reviewed" label with my team, and unfortunately we still have to even with this feature.
- mstade 10y ago
  Similar thing I'd like to see is repo templates. It seems for every repo I create in an organization, I spend time ticking the same boxes over and over. Protected branches for instance is a typical setting I have to duplicate for every repo.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
mintplant 10y ago
Was really hoping "forums" would mean users could add dedicated discussion boards to repositories.
agumonkey 10y ago
I predict, one day github will host a school.
drewolson 10y ago
Reviews are very exciting, but seem to be unable to fit the following use case: I want to setup a repo such that a subset of collaborators (or organization members) can merge reviewed PRs to protected branches. I want the rest of the users to be able to create new branches and submit PRs from them, but _not_ to be able to push to protected branches. They should _only_ be able to land code in protected branches via reviewed PRs (via the merge button). Is there a way to achieve this now that I'm missing? Gitlab's more granular user roles + permissions allow this.
- deeplyoptional 10y ago
  https://github.com/blog/2137-protected-branches-improvements https://github.com/blog/2137-protected-branches-improvements
dkn 10y ago
Gotta love a little competition.
- oneloop 10y ago
  I know, right. GitHub hasn't moved in years, until they felt Atlassian and GitLab starting to close in.
douche 10y ago
Maybe I can finally get my boss to switch off of Unfuddle. Although moving 10 years of history out of a couple dozen SVN repos into git would likely be lots of fun...
dasmoth 10y ago
There's some nice stuff here -- probably some of it that I'll use -- but most of this is targeted at organisations (and in particular, managers and administrators) rather than individual developers. Understandable -- it's clearly companies that are paying the bills these days -- but a little disappointing given the extent to which GitHub got big by attracting lone hackers and little open source projects. If somebody else manages to claim the small-scale end if the market it could eventually spell trouble for GitHub.
- PieterH 10y ago
  This isn't a random shift in direction for github... in the end it will make the platform so complex and irrelevant for open source teams that they will go elsewhere. I wrote an analysis of this shift some time back: http://hintjens.com/blog:111 http://hintjens.com/blog:111
- st3v3r 10y ago
  Why? These features don't change the individual experience at all. You're not forced to use them.
cdnsteve 10y ago
Finally, Github getting some Love! Can't wait to switch to Projects and wave Goodbye Jira. I'm a happy dev today.
- joshmanders 10y ago
  Indeed, when GitLab announced Kanban I tried to migrate, but it just wasn't as great as GitHub, this is the nail in my foot that keeps me at GitHub.
  - sytse 10y ago
    What can we improve in GitLab that would have convinced you to stay?
    - joshmanders 10y ago
      Hey styse! You guys are doing great, don't get me wrong, every time I try you guys out, leaps and bounds. My two biggest things right now are CI docs are very very sparse and hard to figure out as they are not similar to typical CI systems, at least the ones I used (primarily Travis). And the design is very unusual, it's hard to navigate around. For example on GitHub I can click my profile and boom, all repositories right there, on gitlab, i got to go through projects, groups and all this other stuff, it's just not straight forward.
- Nimimi 10y ago
  Take a look at Phabricator's project management and work board, too!
- moby 10y ago
  We're happy that you're happy. :) Keep the feedback coming; we're listening!
  - exception_e 10y ago
    I'm liking the recent design changes, however, I don't like the new implementation of contrib. activity... information overload!
donatj 10y ago
Code reviews currently do not seem to come through on the webhooks at all. Our in-house automation suites depend on it, so this is a big do not use for us. I really wish their APIs weren't second class citizens. It takes weeks or months for new features to show up in the API - if at all. I wish there was 1-1 parity with the API.
- rsanheim 10y ago
  We definitely have plans to get full support into the API around pull request reviews. Given how much iteration we do after an initial ship like this, especially one with as much feedback as code review, we prefer shipping the API after things have solidified and settled down after the wide release.
berns 10y ago
Another Discourse forum. I was sceptical that the Discourse style of forum would become popular. Too complex and heavy, specially for mobile. I must admit that it's looking very good and is very usable.
korva 10y ago
This product video for GitHub Projects features a logo that's exactly like Trello's. Cold. https://youtu.be/NoBI4_9EuUw https://youtu.be/NoBI4_9EuUw
- dkuntz2 10y ago
  That's the symbol they're using for Projects everywhere. If you look at a repo, it's there.
sergiotapia 10y ago
Can we import a Trello project with all it's lists/cards seamlessly into a github repos `project`?
- gerry_shaw 10y ago
  Not even close. Trello has way more features for cards. Project notes are really just a blob of text (Markdown?) and that's it. No title, description, checklists, attachments, or comments. One can imagine them coming though and with the Projects API on the roadmap you would then be able to do an import.
Mizza 10y ago
The inconsistent and non-sensical font and white space on the new profile pages is giving me an indescribable form of anxiety. If anybody out from the GH design team is out there, please put it back to how it was. :(. Example: https://github.com/Miserlou https://github.com/Miserlou 10 font sizes is too many for any one page.
- tomcam 10y ago
  Agreed--trigger warning needed ;)
- SSLy 10y ago
  I on the other hand have troubles reading it all - the contrast is way too small.
- voaie 10y ago
  Just report it: https://github.com/contact https://github.com/contact
- dkuntz2 10y ago
  I haven't checked, but it looks like there's only three.
SEJeff 10y ago
Now I wonder how long before some of these features such as mandatory reviews will make it into Github Enterprise?
- moby 10y ago
  The updated Code Review features will be coming to GitHub Enterprise soon - we always aim to get new features onto the Enterprise platform on the next major release (which occurs every 3 months on average).
  - SEJeff 10y ago
    Thanks, our team was literally lamenting about lacking specific reviewers when migrating from phabricator to github enterprise last week. Looking forward to it!
romanovcode 10y ago
GitHub is playing catch-up with GitLab. Interesting.
prh8 10y ago
I'd really like it if the Pull Requests page would denote which PRs I've already approved. That is one thing I really liked from Bitbucket, it makes it easy to skip over what I've already approved. It would become slightly more complex though, because then you'd probably want to see something for PRs you've approved but had subsequent changes on.
- moby 10y ago
  Great feedback point here - I've passed it along to our Engineering team.
  - prh8 10y ago
    Thank you! Can I make one more request? I'd love to be able to see merge conflicts from the diff page (also like BB does). Knowing the conflict is just db/schema version instead of something more problematic-- that is especially handy when used in conjunction with various target branches. i.e. I know <another-feature> branch is about to be merged before right before <my-branch> gets merged. Then, I can know what I'm going to have to fix quickly without having to go back to terminal, fetch <another-feature>, merge <my-branch>, just to find the conflicts. Yes, I have to do that with master after it's merged anyways, but I find it great to see quickly and at a glance beforehand.
    - moby 10y ago
      Certainly - thanks for that! I've included it here. We're aiming to monitor this board as much as possible, but if there other feature asks that come up, feel free to connect with our Support team - they're also available to take your feature asks and report them to our Engineering team.
      - prh8 10y ago
        A couple days ago I noticed that the status box on the PR page now includes a list of conflicted files. Not sure if that was in any way related to my request here, but wanted to thank you if it was. That is very helpful.
klodolph 10y ago
A minor nit: the commit graph full of green squares should not be encouraged. I don't think that kind of behavior is healthy.
gohwell 10y ago
How about diffs on pull request? The biggest gripe I have with github is the inability to compare my feature branch with the branch I'm merging too. The diff you see is comparing the feature branch with the "base" branch which would be stale when working on a dev team.
- moby 10y ago
  I want to make sure I capture your feedback correctly, so let me know if this doesn't help: we recently released the ability to change your base branch on a PR. https://github.com/blog/2224-change-the-base-branch-of-a-pull-request https://github.com/blog/2224-change-the-base-branch-of-a-pul... Let me know if that helps!
  - gohwell 10y ago
    Here's an example. It's meant to illustrate 2 developers working on a feature branch based on master and one pulls their code in before the other. https://github.com/jparmstrong/gittest/pull/3/files https://github.com/jparmstrong/gittest/pull/3/files - Two feature branches were created based on master at the same time. - Branch1: committed a change to readme and it's pulled into master via PR. - Branch2: committed a change to readme, raised a pull request (PR#3), and the diff doesn't show the line that was added with the branch1 pull request. In this example, the PR is telling me there's a conflict and I need to merge master with the PR branch (this is good). What it doesn't tell me is where the conflict is. Solution, merge the base branch into the interim PR branch. The result will show you the conflict and properly represents what would happen if this PR is accepted. (Bitbucket does this) Thanks for following up. gist of merge master example output: https://gist.github.com/jparmstrong/07cab1a566c5c1495d7c8e075dd65962 https://gist.github.com/jparmstrong/07cab1a566c5c1495d7c8e07...
    - moby 10y ago
      Got it - very helpful. Thanks for clarifying! I've copied this verbatim and sent across to our Platform team.
tav 10y ago
If anyone from GitHub reads this, it would be great if you could use Task Lists [1] within Notes, e.g. Note Title. - [ ] Some subtask. - [x] Another subtask. You could then group subtasks within a single note and tick them off as you go without having to edit the note every time. Cheers and thank you for the fantastic new features! [1] https://github.com/blog/1375-task-lists-in-gfm-issues-pulls-comments https://github.com/blog/1375-task-lists-in-gfm-issues-pulls-...
- moby 10y ago
  Reading, and passing that feedback along to our Engineering team. Thanks!
samblr 10y ago
Can't seem to find free private repos and unlimited collaborators ? But good to see GitHub responding - would be keen to hear from bitbucket which I personally use for private repos.
- gitdude 10y ago
  Here is a list of features we shipped in the last 12 months: https://blog.bitbucket.org/2016/09/07/bitbucket-cloud-5-million-developers-900000-teams/ https://blog.bitbucket.org/2016/09/07/bitbucket-cloud-5-mill...
sorkin2 10y ago
Hmm.. So was there a workflow where I could say "I'd like for this not to be pushed until I've approved it", even if the patch is assigned to be reviewed by someone else? Of course, I could just comment with that on the issue, but it would be nicer if the issue would pop up somehow after the other reviewer has reviewed it, and it would be obvious to everyone that it's waiting for my approval.
makecheck 10y ago
I’m not sure if the name “project” is a good choice here. For one, GitHub still has some pages that refer to the idea of creating projects on GitHub, except those aren’t referring to these new kinds of “projects” (they actually are referring to new repositories or new accounts or something). And, there are literally over a million repositories that have the name Project or Project somewhere in their name[1] so you can now create projects within things that are already called Projects (except the “projects” act more like issues, or tasks, or something). Naming is important, there’s a reason why engineers devote so much time to it. [1] https://github.com/search?p=1&q=project&type=Repositories&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://github.com/search?p=1&q=project&type=Repositories&ut...
- the_duke 10y ago
  I agree, Projects is a poor choice, in my opinion. Some alternatives that randomly come to mind: "Boards", "Plan", "Plans", "Tasks".
old-gregg 10y ago
This is the example of how hard it can be for companies, especially successful companies, to alter their course even slightly. Github success was about making code repositories pretty and social. But this is no longer enough to keep evolving as a company of their size. Yet the internal product DNA still revolves around repos, so as a result, issues, wikis and now Projects (!) live under a single repository. This is backward. A project is a way to group resources to achieve a predefined goal. Those resources include multiple people, multiple issues and multiple repositories. Sticking a project under a repository makes no sense. In fact, a code repository in most organizations is a fairly small and an insignificant asset, just another way to organize code, i.e. function -> module -> directory -> repository, etc. It's quite awkward to think of what your company is doing in terms of repositories, so anything Github adds to repos feels out of place by default. Another example of repository-centric thinking is the homepage of https://github.com https://github.com itself when a user is logged in. It's the most important page of all, yet nothing on it has any relevance to me: just a list of people I like starring random repos. Same thing for the organization home page, just a list of repos, again. The Project idea is great. It had the potential to solve all of these issues by giving me a tool to organize digital assets in a way that's important to me. But sticking it under a repository killed it. [EDIT] It's easy to be me and be posting a comment like this, telling successful people what to do. But it's enormously hard to have a large team of PMs, developers and designers, all of whom are smart and ambitious individuals, to actually do something that falls outside of the settled way of doing things. Kudos to Github founders and employees for getting it this far and congratulations on dealing with big company problems ;)
- Myrmornis 10y ago
  Although there will still be lots of projects (e.g. `an open source project with one repo`, `some company with a huge monolithic repo`) that will be able to use per-repo Projects profitably. But yes, someone, please make something that kills JIRA as soon as possible.
  - brandur 10y ago
    I think they could iterate on this to a place where projects are repository-specific, but still useful for high-level organization and planning. For example, if they allowed repo projects to reference issues in other repos, that would you get you 99% of the way there. You could start a single meta-repository that referenced as many repo-specific issues as you cared to consider.
fosk 10y ago
If anybody from GitHub is here, I have a feedback on the new Reviews feature. When the Review approval is missing or required, please make it clear in the "Pull Requests" list-view by updating the color of the little dot and it's popup description. Right now the colored dot and its description are only including "Checks" but not "Reviews". It would be nice to have a clear indicator of which Pull Requests are missing a review just by looking at the list.
jcoffland 10y ago
Oh how I want the ability to group repos into projects on GitHub. Thought this was it. It's not.
dham 10y ago
I'm actually really interested in the tech stack they used to make these new features. Specifically Projects. No latest and greatest framework or anything of that caliber. Just plain PJAX which is what everything else they have done uses. That's pretty cool to me. Looks like a pretty strong engineering culture of using stuff that works, instead of the shiniest object at the moment in time.
LinuxFreedom 10y ago
GitHub does not give you the freedom to control your privacy settings. Every click you do is tracked and published. That is not ok and illegal in many countries, especially if you are using it in a professional work environment. The main selling point of github is that companies can track what their developers are doing in great detail. And all you people are hooraying them - "YES, we want to obey! We love to live in chains! We do not care for the crazy guys that talk about that stupid freedom thing!" Maybe in a company project that kind of extreme privacy destruction is ok, when a well paid developer agrees to be monitored in such an extreme way. But it is definitely not ok to make this the default and to not give you control over it. Totally absurd that people made that site the new opensource mekka. This could be only topped by something that would be really crazy, like e.g. if they had not an actual issue tracker for the product itself. Or, even more bizarr, if the product was not open source itself... oh, wait... We lost a whole generation of develpers that do not even think about these kind of things and are completely ok with that extreme level of tracking and do not mind that they are hurting people that care. Post-Snowden reality is almost surreal. Too many sheepminded followers.
Animats 10y ago
I just hope Github doesn't pivot in a direction that makes them no longer a safe place to archive open source code. We've had two failures already - Google Code (shut down) and Sourceforge (started putting adware on the executables of others.) Github, please don't blow it.
rileytg 10y ago
anyone else consider this too little too late?
shurcooL 10y ago
I've just used the new review mode to do a bigger (still medium) sized review [0], and it was quite nice. It's strange that I can edit any of the inline comments, but not the actual review body itself. What if I made a typo there? [0] https://github.com/google/go-github/pull/427#pullrequestreview-104460 https://github.com/google/go-github/pull/427#pullrequestrevi...
reustle 10y ago
My team and I played around with Projects for a little bit and these are things that were blockers / annoyances for us from moving away from trello. I'm posting because I know some GH people are reading these comments. - Mobile support: Trello mobile app is great, projects web doesn't even resize for mobile. - Slack support: Card Created notifications - Easier “card” preview: Projects requires you to go to a new page to view a card - Projects (1): This little "1" will always be 1. At least with PRs and Issues it means something (pending tasks, etc). - Limited to one repo I also found it funny that they call it "notes" as in "add note" "delete note" etc, but there is a menu item on each card that says "Copy Card URL". Maybe they renamed from "cards" to "notes" mid development? :)
Corrado 10y ago
I think their recent change to per user pricing plays into this nicely. These features look really cool, but I can see it being costly to an organization when you have to give managers, project managers, etc. access to Github just so they can manage issues.
musicmatze 10y ago
What I really wonder right now: When reviewing my own PR on my own repo, I cannot select that the things I proposed must be resolved before the PR can be merged - why is that? Am I not allowed to keep myself from merging things I considered changeworthy or what?

1142 points by joshmanders 10y ago

source99 10y ago

Link goes right to 404 - Thats one heck of a new feature.

homeyer 10y ago
Heh, 404s if you aren't logged in to GitHub
- source99 10y ago
  Nope. I was logged in. Guessing it was something else. I like how I got downvoted for providing information...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

huac 10y ago

Definitely cool, but weren't you always able to comment inline on a PR?

Arnavion 10y ago
The GIF shows "Start Review" button and "Finish your review" buttons (and a "Pending" flag), which makes me think this is more geared to the complaints that every comment sent an individual email instead of being batched when the reviewer was ready to send them out. Edit: Indeed, from the github blog post - "You can also leave a review summary and delete, edit, or bundle comments before you submit them."

Arnavion 10y ago

1st party link: https://github.com/blog/2256-a-whole-new-github-universe-announcing-new-tools-forums-and-features https://github.com/blog/2256-a-whole-new-github-universe-ann...

joshmanders 10y ago
Can we get this updated to this? defunkt didn't post this blog post before TechCrunch talked about it. I'd much rather had linked to it.
- sctb 10y ago
  OK, we've updated the link from https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/14/github-gets-built-in-project-management-tools-and-support-for-reviews/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/14/github-gets-built-in-proje....
  - joshmanders 10y ago
    Thank you! I haven't said it lately, but the team behind this community is great. Quickly becoming my favorite forum.

stevejohnson 10y ago

Missed opportunity to call the platform forum the "GitHub PlatForum."

nchelluri 10y ago
I'm not sure "missed opportunity" is the right name for that :)

Hovertruck 10y ago

Batch review has been my #1 most desired feature for Github for many years now. This is great!

rsanheim 10y ago
Thanks! It has been on our list for a long time as well, excited to get it shipped.

bsimpson 10y ago

I'll be curious to see if they've made API granularity more sane. We haven't been able to use any third party tools because our security people don't feel great about giving third parties write access to everything (including our source) for tools that don't need it. In the past, GitHub hasn't differentiated write access to issues (which many tools need) and write access to the source itself (which basically nothing should need).

bhuga 10y ago
This is an important part of the new integrations early access program: https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-09-14-Integrations-Early-Access/ https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-09-14-Integrations...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
web007 10y ago
Plus a million - I'm not sure how this still isn't a feature. Considering all of the PCI-DSS / HIPAA / SOX / etc. audit points around change control (even ignoring corporate versions of the same) it's practically impossible to add external services to GH and have them be useful while still meeting compliance. Change control is required, but that also implies control of change control. As-is any service could delete all of your content, whether intentionally or inadvertently, or even worse could corrupt or otherwise alter your history. It may be detectable and recoverable because git, but it would be infinitely easier to have code and PR be r--rw-. EDIT: This is now a thing, according to @bhuga below. Also, GH is now publishing a roadmap for what's coming down the pipe, so we're not in the dark as to when these critically-important-why-isnt-it-out-yet features are being worked on. https://developer.github.com/early-access/platform-roadmap/ https://developer.github.com/early-access/platform-roadmap/
welder 10y ago
WakaTime has been bitten by this lack of granularity too... it hurts integration usage when we ask for code access when we only need commit log messages.
10y ago

scrollaway 10y ago

Impressive. I have to think that this is all competition fostered by Gitlab - all those features were present in Gitlab. Competition at work :)

imsodrunklol 10y ago
I have been a huge pusher for GitLab, and my basic reasoning was that GitHub isn't open sourced like GitLab. GitHub was going awfully slow and no communication to its customers in new features. Looks like GitLab lit a fire underneath them. I wonder which one is "better". Nevertheless, at least there is competition now. SCM is the biggest component in any coding practices, I'm that it is finally getting attention.
- midwestcode 10y ago
  Hopefully the community forum will help GitHub to keep in touch with the community!

deathanatos 10y ago

I sent this to support, but the "Files changed" tab in Pull Requests now has an announcement "We've made some change to reviewing code" The "Learn more" button on that banner is a broken link… (It's a good thing this HN post later directed me to the blog post, as now I've learned from that.)

moby 10y ago
Sorry about that! Is the link working now?
- deathanatos 10y ago
  Looks like it is! (The URL that was broken now has content; the banner has since vanished for me.)
  - moby 10y ago
    Excellent. :)

BinaryIdiot 10y ago

The review stuff is semi similar to what I requested GitLab do and I'm surprised it's taken so long for anyone to really do it. It's a great workflow. I'm still not convinced about keeping all of your project's management in the version control system (I mean I prefer issues in there but the rest seems...wrong to me for whatever biased reason I have). Overall looks good! When does Enterprise get these features? :)

moby 10y ago
We're glad you like it! This is the first of many Code Review enhancements we'll be providing, so stay tuned. These features will be coming to GitHub Enterprise soon - we always aim to get new features onto the Enterprise platform on the next major release (which occurs every 3 months on average).
Nimimi 10y ago
Phabricator and Gerrit had this for ages!
majewsky 10y ago
The review stuff actually reminded me of http://review.ninja http://review.ninja, which has existed for at least 1.5 years at this point.

dblooman 10y ago

Wonder how services like Waffle will react to this

homeyer 10y ago
http://blog.waffle.io/say-hello-to-wafflebot/ http://blog.waffle.io/say-hello-to-wafflebot/

bowmessage 10y ago

Is this the death of Trello?

toddsiegel 10y ago
Lots of non-devs use Trello. Trello also has lot of features this does not, but I can see GH users using Trello jumping to this, like me.
jglovier 10y ago
Very unlikely. We hope that Projects will be the best place for people to coordinate work on a GitHub repository, but that doesn't really limit Trello's value much. They'll continue to offer lots of value as a great way to coordinate work for many contexts outside GitHub repositories.
eyelidlessness 10y ago
I'd switch instantly if: 1. There was a faster and more contextual way to edit issues on a project. 2. There was a way to set up an opinionated workflow where e.g. opening a PR against an issue moves the issue to "Review"; closing said PR moves issue to "Done" and closes it; closing an issue directly moves it to "Done" and vice versa. Without this, there's way too much interaction required for even GitHub's own preferred workflow. 3. Automatic bidirectional linking between issue/PR on the project board. (Honestly haven't had a chance to see if it does this, but will on the next PR I open.) 4. Automatically pre-fill a backlog with existing issues. 5. A project could span multiple repositories (e.g. for tracking user stories which might be addressed in an API or frontend repo, or both). We also track non-dev work on our Trello board, and a project per repo doesn't support this. 6. Filtering. Edit... Also nice to have: ability to reference a checklist item in a link from PR to issue, check it on merge, and so on.
- mr_november 10y ago
  Hi - Codetree [1] does a lot of what you're asking for (specifically 3, 5, 6) and I love the other stuff you mention, we've been thinking hard on a couple of them. Would love to quickly chat about your workflow just to learn, not to sell, if you can spare the 15 mins. If you're interested shoot me an email at arif@codetree.com. [1] https://codetree.com https://codetree.com

sgarrity 10y ago

Some nice improvements here. It appears, though, that Projects suffer from the same problem we've had with Issues: they are limited to one repo. I know there are some tools to manage Issues across repos, but for the most part, the tools seem to assume you work on only one repo, or that milestones only affect a single repo. I would love to see projects/milestones become more capable when dealing with cross-repo issues.

rohamg 10y ago
Take a look at ZenHub [1] - it lets you stay inside GitHub, but adds much more full-featured project management capabilities including multi-repo boards and advanced reporting features like estimates, issue hierarchy (epics), personal to-dos, burndown and velocity charts, etc. [1] https://www.zenhub.com https://www.zenhub.com
ajsharma 10y ago
At Goldbely, our solution has been to have a single GitHub repo that's just for issues and use tags to highlight the actual code repos involved. Works pretty well, if a little awkward at first.
- elwell 10y ago
  We do this as well at Purple [0]. It does make issue referencing in commit messages a bit unwieldy; you have to include the full path to the issue (e.g., org-name/repo-name#34). [0] - http://purpleapp.com http://purpleapp.com
scrollaway 10y ago
Yup! Using Projects will force us to maintain multiple projects for one single "real" project, as our code is split across multiple repositories. (Web app, desktop client, infrastructure, company issues, etc) I suspect it's still a lot better than the alternative but not having org-wide Projects is a little sad.
rogerbinns 10y ago
This has been why we don't use github's issues, wikis, and why we won't use their projects. For example if the overall product has a web site repo, server repo, iOS repo and an Android repo then they need to be used as a coherent whole. An issue might be reported against iOS but the cause is in the server, so the ticket would need to be moved. Rinse and repeat for all the other interactions of piece, and that collaborators often don't know (and shouldn't need to) precisely what issues, wikis etc correspond to which repo. The now defunct Google Code had a very good solution for this. You could create additional "sub" repositories alongside the "main" one. Github already does that for the wiki, but doesn't generalise it to allowing additional ones. I'm somewhat convinced this is because github has the whole "charge by the repository" model, which is at odds for being useful for projects that require multiple git level repos.

captn3m0 10y ago

This is a rough summary of what all I read in the blog post: 1. projects. replaces trello, waffle.io, zenhub and many other similar services. 2. code reviews allow approval/request changes as sunny's screenshot shows 3. reviews can be made mandatory. 4. github platform integrations is getting a roadmap 5. a graphql api to query their database 6. enforce 2fa in organizations (much love for this one) 7. summarized timeline for your contibutions Just a few days back, at the GitLab release, I'd noticed a lot of complains about gitlab releasing useful and impactful features and github being slow on releases. Moreover, now with a public roadmap (even if it is just for platforms), it is a great start. I'm really liking this change in pace. mods: Can we make this the canonical discussion for this topic? Otherwise, a lot of branching will happen

thegarside 10y ago
Doesn't look like Projects comes close to replacing ZenHub / Waffle.. Not for proper teams anyway – real project management needs to be much more robust so I'm keeping ZenHub for now.
jglovier 10y ago
>projects. replaces trello, waffle.io, zenhub and many other similar services. This is really not about replacing those services, it's more about building a better foundation for integrators like Waffle and ZenHub to build on.
- captn3m0 10y ago
  I'm looking at https://www.zenhub.com/product https://www.zenhub.com/product, and while it does have some extra features (filters on priority, labels), but for most people the base set provided by github is gonna be sufficient. Sure, it won't completely replace them, but GitHub building this as a platform counts as competition.
  - ma138 10y ago
    Using ZenHub also provides additional features like time estimation, burndown charts and Epics (for issue hierarchy) - we find that for larger teams, these are must-have features to work inside GitHub.

vcarl 10y ago

The improvements to code reviews are really exciting. Having comments submit all at once instead of one at a time is a great UX change, I've definitely gotten sidetracked mid-review because somebody started responding to my initial comments when I'm neck deep. Comment threading is super useful for discussion-heavy comments like code review, and an in-UI approve/request changes is great.

moby 10y ago
That's awesome to hear - we're glad you like those changes! As you dive into it further, let us know how it works for you.

hannob 10y ago

And still no HTTPS for github pages with custom domains...

dorianm 10y ago
You can use Cloudflare for that. (That's what I do on https://doma.io https://doma.io)

avitzurel 10y ago

Batched review and pending state have both been a long time coming. Most of the times when I do a review it's not a single comment and right now the workflow is to let the team know on Slack that I am reviewing this. From the Gif it's not 100% clear what the pending state does but I would want something like blocking the PR until every team member that started reviewing will "release" the PR. I also see the negative side of this of course but I think the positive outweighs the negatives.

mwarkentin 10y ago
You can block merges until there's an "approved" code review in the Protected Branches setting. I don't think it has anything like "everyone who reviewed must approve" though.

toddsiegel 10y ago

If anyone from Github reads this, a) this looks great, b) add project templates please, so we don't have to recreate the same columns every time. Thanks. <3

jglovier 10y ago
Great idea. Thanks!
- toddsiegel 10y ago
  While I have your attention. A few thoughts on code reviews. It's be nice if 1) approvals somehow show up on the pull requests index page, 2) create a notification within GH, 3) send an email. Right now you have to go to the PR page itself to see approvals. Edit: I saw an approval email notification on one PR, but not another. Thanks!
  - rsanheim 10y ago
    All reviews definitely generate notifications. We definitely want to get some way to surface reviews better across all PR's and/or projects. I've been bothered by that myself while we were building this. :)
  - reustle 10y ago
    +1 for seeing approvals visually on the pull request index page. I currently use a "Reviewed" label with my team, and unfortunately we still have to even with this feature.
mstade 10y ago
Similar thing I'd like to see is repo templates. It seems for every repo I create in an organization, I spend time ticking the same boxes over and over. Protected branches for instance is a typical setting I have to duplicate for every repo.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

mintplant 10y ago

Was really hoping "forums" would mean users could add dedicated discussion boards to repositories.

agumonkey 10y ago

I predict, one day github will host a school.

drewolson 10y ago

Reviews are very exciting, but seem to be unable to fit the following use case: I want to setup a repo such that a subset of collaborators (or organization members) can merge reviewed PRs to protected branches. I want the rest of the users to be able to create new branches and submit PRs from them, but _not_ to be able to push to protected branches. They should _only_ be able to land code in protected branches via reviewed PRs (via the merge button). Is there a way to achieve this now that I'm missing? Gitlab's more granular user roles + permissions allow this.

deeplyoptional 10y ago
https://github.com/blog/2137-protected-branches-improvements https://github.com/blog/2137-protected-branches-improvements

dkn 10y ago

Gotta love a little competition.

oneloop 10y ago
I know, right. GitHub hasn't moved in years, until they felt Atlassian and GitLab starting to close in.

douche 10y ago

Maybe I can finally get my boss to switch off of Unfuddle. Although moving 10 years of history out of a couple dozen SVN repos into git would likely be lots of fun...

dasmoth 10y ago

There's some nice stuff here -- probably some of it that I'll use -- but most of this is targeted at organisations (and in particular, managers and administrators) rather than individual developers. Understandable -- it's clearly companies that are paying the bills these days -- but a little disappointing given the extent to which GitHub got big by attracting lone hackers and little open source projects. If somebody else manages to claim the small-scale end if the market it could eventually spell trouble for GitHub.

PieterH 10y ago
This isn't a random shift in direction for github... in the end it will make the platform so complex and irrelevant for open source teams that they will go elsewhere. I wrote an analysis of this shift some time back: http://hintjens.com/blog:111 http://hintjens.com/blog:111
st3v3r 10y ago
Why? These features don't change the individual experience at all. You're not forced to use them.

cdnsteve 10y ago

Finally, Github getting some Love! Can't wait to switch to Projects and wave Goodbye Jira. I'm a happy dev today.

joshmanders 10y ago
Indeed, when GitLab announced Kanban I tried to migrate, but it just wasn't as great as GitHub, this is the nail in my foot that keeps me at GitHub.
- sytse 10y ago
  What can we improve in GitLab that would have convinced you to stay?
  - joshmanders 10y ago
    Hey styse! You guys are doing great, don't get me wrong, every time I try you guys out, leaps and bounds. My two biggest things right now are CI docs are very very sparse and hard to figure out as they are not similar to typical CI systems, at least the ones I used (primarily Travis). And the design is very unusual, it's hard to navigate around. For example on GitHub I can click my profile and boom, all repositories right there, on gitlab, i got to go through projects, groups and all this other stuff, it's just not straight forward.
Nimimi 10y ago
Take a look at Phabricator's project management and work board, too!
moby 10y ago
We're happy that you're happy. :) Keep the feedback coming; we're listening!
- exception_e 10y ago
  I'm liking the recent design changes, however, I don't like the new implementation of contrib. activity... information overload!

donatj 10y ago

Code reviews currently do not seem to come through on the webhooks at all. Our in-house automation suites depend on it, so this is a big do not use for us. I really wish their APIs weren't second class citizens. It takes weeks or months for new features to show up in the API - if at all. I wish there was 1-1 parity with the API.

rsanheim 10y ago
We definitely have plans to get full support into the API around pull request reviews. Given how much iteration we do after an initial ship like this, especially one with as much feedback as code review, we prefer shipping the API after things have solidified and settled down after the wide release.

berns 10y ago

Another Discourse forum. I was sceptical that the Discourse style of forum would become popular. Too complex and heavy, specially for mobile. I must admit that it's looking very good and is very usable.

korva 10y ago

This product video for GitHub Projects features a logo that's exactly like Trello's. Cold. https://youtu.be/NoBI4_9EuUw https://youtu.be/NoBI4_9EuUw

dkuntz2 10y ago
That's the symbol they're using for Projects everywhere. If you look at a repo, it's there.

sergiotapia 10y ago

Can we import a Trello project with all it's lists/cards seamlessly into a github repos `project`?

gerry_shaw 10y ago
Not even close. Trello has way more features for cards. Project notes are really just a blob of text (Markdown?) and that's it. No title, description, checklists, attachments, or comments. One can imagine them coming though and with the Projects API on the roadmap you would then be able to do an import.

Mizza 10y ago

The inconsistent and non-sensical font and white space on the new profile pages is giving me an indescribable form of anxiety. If anybody out from the GH design team is out there, please put it back to how it was. :(. Example: https://github.com/Miserlou https://github.com/Miserlou 10 font sizes is too many for any one page.

tomcam 10y ago
Agreed--trigger warning needed ;)
SSLy 10y ago
I on the other hand have troubles reading it all - the contrast is way too small.
voaie 10y ago
Just report it: https://github.com/contact https://github.com/contact
dkuntz2 10y ago
I haven't checked, but it looks like there's only three.

SEJeff 10y ago

Now I wonder how long before some of these features such as mandatory reviews will make it into Github Enterprise?

moby 10y ago
The updated Code Review features will be coming to GitHub Enterprise soon - we always aim to get new features onto the Enterprise platform on the next major release (which occurs every 3 months on average).
- SEJeff 10y ago
  Thanks, our team was literally lamenting about lacking specific reviewers when migrating from phabricator to github enterprise last week. Looking forward to it!

romanovcode 10y ago

GitHub is playing catch-up with GitLab. Interesting.

prh8 10y ago

I'd really like it if the Pull Requests page would denote which PRs I've already approved. That is one thing I really liked from Bitbucket, it makes it easy to skip over what I've already approved. It would become slightly more complex though, because then you'd probably want to see something for PRs you've approved but had subsequent changes on.

moby 10y ago
Great feedback point here - I've passed it along to our Engineering team.
- prh8 10y ago
  Thank you! Can I make one more request? I'd love to be able to see merge conflicts from the diff page (also like BB does). Knowing the conflict is just db/schema version instead of something more problematic-- that is especially handy when used in conjunction with various target branches. i.e. I know <another-feature> branch is about to be merged before right before <my-branch> gets merged. Then, I can know what I'm going to have to fix quickly without having to go back to terminal, fetch <another-feature>, merge <my-branch>, just to find the conflicts. Yes, I have to do that with master after it's merged anyways, but I find it great to see quickly and at a glance beforehand.
  - moby 10y ago
    Certainly - thanks for that! I've included it here. We're aiming to monitor this board as much as possible, but if there other feature asks that come up, feel free to connect with our Support team - they're also available to take your feature asks and report them to our Engineering team.
    - prh8 10y ago
      A couple days ago I noticed that the status box on the PR page now includes a list of conflicted files. Not sure if that was in any way related to my request here, but wanted to thank you if it was. That is very helpful.

klodolph 10y ago

A minor nit: the commit graph full of green squares should not be encouraged. I don't think that kind of behavior is healthy.

gohwell 10y ago

How about diffs on pull request? The biggest gripe I have with github is the inability to compare my feature branch with the branch I'm merging too. The diff you see is comparing the feature branch with the "base" branch which would be stale when working on a dev team.

moby 10y ago
I want to make sure I capture your feedback correctly, so let me know if this doesn't help: we recently released the ability to change your base branch on a PR. https://github.com/blog/2224-change-the-base-branch-of-a-pull-request https://github.com/blog/2224-change-the-base-branch-of-a-pul... Let me know if that helps!
- gohwell 10y ago
  Here's an example. It's meant to illustrate 2 developers working on a feature branch based on master and one pulls their code in before the other. https://github.com/jparmstrong/gittest/pull/3/files https://github.com/jparmstrong/gittest/pull/3/files - Two feature branches were created based on master at the same time. - Branch1: committed a change to readme and it's pulled into master via PR. - Branch2: committed a change to readme, raised a pull request (PR#3), and the diff doesn't show the line that was added with the branch1 pull request. In this example, the PR is telling me there's a conflict and I need to merge master with the PR branch (this is good). What it doesn't tell me is where the conflict is. Solution, merge the base branch into the interim PR branch. The result will show you the conflict and properly represents what would happen if this PR is accepted. (Bitbucket does this) Thanks for following up. gist of merge master example output: https://gist.github.com/jparmstrong/07cab1a566c5c1495d7c8e075dd65962 https://gist.github.com/jparmstrong/07cab1a566c5c1495d7c8e07...
  - moby 10y ago
    Got it - very helpful. Thanks for clarifying! I've copied this verbatim and sent across to our Platform team.

tav 10y ago

If anyone from GitHub reads this, it would be great if you could use Task Lists [1] within Notes, e.g. Note Title. - [ ] Some subtask. - [x] Another subtask. You could then group subtasks within a single note and tick them off as you go without having to edit the note every time. Cheers and thank you for the fantastic new features! [1] https://github.com/blog/1375-task-lists-in-gfm-issues-pulls-comments https://github.com/blog/1375-task-lists-in-gfm-issues-pulls-...

moby 10y ago
Reading, and passing that feedback along to our Engineering team. Thanks!

samblr 10y ago

Can't seem to find free private repos and unlimited collaborators ? But good to see GitHub responding - would be keen to hear from bitbucket which I personally use for private repos.

gitdude 10y ago
Here is a list of features we shipped in the last 12 months: https://blog.bitbucket.org/2016/09/07/bitbucket-cloud-5-million-developers-900000-teams/ https://blog.bitbucket.org/2016/09/07/bitbucket-cloud-5-mill...

sorkin2 10y ago

Hmm.. So was there a workflow where I could say "I'd like for this not to be pushed until I've approved it", even if the patch is assigned to be reviewed by someone else? Of course, I could just comment with that on the issue, but it would be nicer if the issue would pop up somehow after the other reviewer has reviewed it, and it would be obvious to everyone that it's waiting for my approval.

makecheck 10y ago

I’m not sure if the name “project” is a good choice here. For one, GitHub still has some pages that refer to the idea of creating projects on GitHub, except those aren’t referring to these new kinds of “projects” (they actually are referring to new repositories or new accounts or something). And, there are literally over a million repositories that have the name Project or Project somewhere in their name[1] so you can now create projects within things that are already called Projects (except the “projects” act more like issues, or tasks, or something). Naming is important, there’s a reason why engineers devote so much time to it. [1] https://github.com/search?p=1&q=project&type=Repositories&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://github.com/search?p=1&q=project&type=Repositories&ut...

the_duke 10y ago
I agree, Projects is a poor choice, in my opinion. Some alternatives that randomly come to mind: "Boards", "Plan", "Plans", "Tasks".

old-gregg 10y ago

This is the example of how hard it can be for companies, especially successful companies, to alter their course even slightly. Github success was about making code repositories pretty and social. But this is no longer enough to keep evolving as a company of their size. Yet the internal product DNA still revolves around repos, so as a result, issues, wikis and now Projects (!) live under a single repository. This is backward. A project is a way to group resources to achieve a predefined goal. Those resources include multiple people, multiple issues and multiple repositories. Sticking a project under a repository makes no sense. In fact, a code repository in most organizations is a fairly small and an insignificant asset, just another way to organize code, i.e. function -> module -> directory -> repository, etc. It's quite awkward to think of what your company is doing in terms of repositories, so anything Github adds to repos feels out of place by default. Another example of repository-centric thinking is the homepage of https://github.com https://github.com itself when a user is logged in. It's the most important page of all, yet nothing on it has any relevance to me: just a list of people I like starring random repos. Same thing for the organization home page, just a list of repos, again. The Project idea is great. It had the potential to solve all of these issues by giving me a tool to organize digital assets in a way that's important to me. But sticking it under a repository killed it. [EDIT] It's easy to be me and be posting a comment like this, telling successful people what to do. But it's enormously hard to have a large team of PMs, developers and designers, all of whom are smart and ambitious individuals, to actually do something that falls outside of the settled way of doing things. Kudos to Github founders and employees for getting it this far and congratulations on dealing with big company problems ;)

Myrmornis 10y ago
Although there will still be lots of projects (e.g. `an open source project with one repo`, `some company with a huge monolithic repo`) that will be able to use per-repo Projects profitably. But yes, someone, please make something that kills JIRA as soon as possible.
- brandur 10y ago
  I think they could iterate on this to a place where projects are repository-specific, but still useful for high-level organization and planning. For example, if they allowed repo projects to reference issues in other repos, that would you get you 99% of the way there. You could start a single meta-repository that referenced as many repo-specific issues as you cared to consider.

fosk 10y ago

If anybody from GitHub is here, I have a feedback on the new Reviews feature. When the Review approval is missing or required, please make it clear in the "Pull Requests" list-view by updating the color of the little dot and it's popup description. Right now the colored dot and its description are only including "Checks" but not "Reviews". It would be nice to have a clear indicator of which Pull Requests are missing a review just by looking at the list.

jcoffland 10y ago

Oh how I want the ability to group repos into projects on GitHub. Thought this was it. It's not.

dham 10y ago

I'm actually really interested in the tech stack they used to make these new features. Specifically Projects. No latest and greatest framework or anything of that caliber. Just plain PJAX which is what everything else they have done uses. That's pretty cool to me. Looks like a pretty strong engineering culture of using stuff that works, instead of the shiniest object at the moment in time.

LinuxFreedom 10y ago

GitHub does not give you the freedom to control your privacy settings. Every click you do is tracked and published. That is not ok and illegal in many countries, especially if you are using it in a professional work environment. The main selling point of github is that companies can track what their developers are doing in great detail. And all you people are hooraying them - "YES, we want to obey! We love to live in chains! We do not care for the crazy guys that talk about that stupid freedom thing!" Maybe in a company project that kind of extreme privacy destruction is ok, when a well paid developer agrees to be monitored in such an extreme way. But it is definitely not ok to make this the default and to not give you control over it. Totally absurd that people made that site the new opensource mekka. This could be only topped by something that would be really crazy, like e.g. if they had not an actual issue tracker for the product itself. Or, even more bizarr, if the product was not open source itself... oh, wait... We lost a whole generation of develpers that do not even think about these kind of things and are completely ok with that extreme level of tracking and do not mind that they are hurting people that care. Post-Snowden reality is almost surreal. Too many sheepminded followers.

Animats 10y ago

I just hope Github doesn't pivot in a direction that makes them no longer a safe place to archive open source code. We've had two failures already - Google Code (shut down) and Sourceforge (started putting adware on the executables of others.) Github, please don't blow it.

rileytg 10y ago

anyone else consider this too little too late?

shurcooL 10y ago

I've just used the new review mode to do a bigger (still medium) sized review [0], and it was quite nice. It's strange that I can edit any of the inline comments, but not the actual review body itself. What if I made a typo there? [0] https://github.com/google/go-github/pull/427#pullrequestreview-104460 https://github.com/google/go-github/pull/427#pullrequestrevi...

reustle 10y ago

My team and I played around with Projects for a little bit and these are things that were blockers / annoyances for us from moving away from trello. I'm posting because I know some GH people are reading these comments. - Mobile support: Trello mobile app is great, projects web doesn't even resize for mobile. - Slack support: Card Created notifications - Easier “card” preview: Projects requires you to go to a new page to view a card - Projects (1): This little "1" will always be 1. At least with PRs and Issues it means something (pending tasks, etc). - Limited to one repo I also found it funny that they call it "notes" as in "add note" "delete note" etc, but there is a menu item on each card that says "Copy Card URL". Maybe they renamed from "cards" to "notes" mid development? :)

Corrado 10y ago

I think their recent change to per user pricing plays into this nicely. These features look really cool, but I can see it being costly to an organization when you have to give managers, project managers, etc. access to Github just so they can manage issues.

musicmatze 10y ago

What I really wonder right now: When reviewing my own PR on my own repo, I cannot select that the things I proposed must be resolved before the PR can be merged - why is that? Am I not allowed to keep myself from merging things I considered changeworthy or what?