4 ms·
>If you have an account and you're participating in a project in any way through github.com, you're part of its social network. What part of GitHub does this p
by f2n 9y ago
>If you have an account and you're participating in a project in any way through github.com, you're part of its social network.
What part of GitHub does this person have a problem with? It's entirely unclear what they mean by social network. Is that like, showing the commits you make on your profile? Having a page that shows what you've worked on at all? This seems like good ways to be difficult to work with in open source projects for zero benefit.
- carussell 9y agoThe person who wrote that post is me. > Is that like, showing the commits you make on your profile? Yes. > Having a page that shows what you've worked on at all? Yes. > This seems like good ways to be difficult to work with in open source projects First, open source doesn't start and end with GitHub. Second, I prefer not to publish anything to Facebook or Twitter feeds, either. That's a position that folks seem to find palatable. (In fact, it's one that programmers appear to be disproportionately sympathetic to.) I don't see why it shouldn't remain so if the subject of the conversation is GitHub. > for zero benefit Opting out of the same kinds of personal broadcasting on GitHub isn't "zero benefit" to me. And if it is zero-benefit, it means the service linked here is zero-value. I feel differently. We don't have to agree.
- f2n 9y ago>First, open source doesn't start and end with GitHub. I didn't mean to imply it is, but if an open source project finds it easier to use one platform (such as github), trying to subvert that by emailing patches sounds like a very annoying thing to do. It seems similar to submitting pull requests to the Linux Kernel on GitHub, which explicitly requests that you submit patches on the mailing list.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- carussell 9y agoI'm not here to defend arguments I never made.