7 ms·

I think public code will still live on github, but I See FAANG 100% avoiding any private github repos from now on.

johannes1234321 8y ago
They already did. Except maybe for test setups and to configure a project before announcing it. All those companies keep their privates private. GitHub is just a public showroom for them. Again this is different for other/smaller companies.
- diminoten 8y ago
  Ah, I think that's how it's always been. What's the difference between me running my small company out of Azure, and keeping the source code in GitHub, now that Microsoft owns it? Nothing changes immediately for any of us, to me the biggest concern is what happens after those roadmapped projects have run through. What goes next on that roadmap, and will it stick to the principles I love about GitHub, or will it start to veer into Microsoft's territory?
SiVal 8y ago
Bigger tech companies not only do not host important private source code on Github but won't even host on outsourced physical servers. Where I've worked (incl. well-known names), information that we wanted spread to the world could be hosted on trusted external systems (trust still mattered to keep it from being "edited"), but non-public info was always hosted inside a physical building that we owned watched 24/7 by human guards we employed.
- hirsin 8y ago
  Not entirely true. Microsoft puts (almost? Yet to find anything that isn't) all our code on VSTS which is accessible remotely, without VPN. I've checked in a (very very minor docs) fix to the Windows code base from my Android phone over LTE.
  - electronvolt 8y ago
    Yeah, which is hosted on Azure, a data center that Microsoft owns and employs guards for, and secured behind our standard corporate authentication. :) (Source: I work at Microsoft, near the VSTS team.)
    - com2kid 8y ago
      > Yeah, which is hosted on Azure, a data center that Microsoft owns and employs guards for, and secured behind our standard corporate authentication. :) Way back when, Microsoft used to host a bunch of auth servers for banks. A friend of mine mentioned an armed guard in front of the data center for that particular service. I've worked on teams at MS where there was a (non-armed) guard checking everyone who got off the elevator, but before I joined MS I was once left alone in a room full of computers open to the Windows source tree, wearing my "do not leave guest unattended" badge. Mileage might vary and all that.
      - electronvolt 8y ago
        Yeah, all I was really saying was that the grandparent's comment and the parent's comment weren't in opposition. Microsoft owns the data center the code lives in and certainly takes care of physical security.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - SiVal 8y ago
    That's amazing. Contrast that to my friend who works on code at Apple that's so guarded that he can't even access it from Apple HQ. He has to travel to his office in an unmarked Apple bldg several miles from HQ (in an unmarked van) and access the code from inside the bldg. Any attempt to work on his code outside that bldg, on the Apple employee shuttle for example, will result in immediate firing with possible criminal charges. Admittedly, that's not the usual Apple employee, but the contrast between that and Microsoft's, which may as well be hosted on a set of Chinese night market DVDs, is LOL-worthy.
- phillipcarter 8y ago
  MS employee here: Long before the acquisition, we've been hosting important stuff in private GitHub repositories. Including having strategic discussions in those private repositories. We've also done a lot of that stuff in public too. Some might say a bit too much, given that we've had things leaked and/or misinterpreted w.r.t product direction in the past. I still agree with your point, but I believe more of this sort of thing is happening. Lots of stuff that has no real reason to be private is just being open source by default.
  - 8_hours_ago 8y ago
    > Long before the acquisition, we've been hosting important stuff in private GitHub repositories. Including having strategic discussions in those private repositories. Wow! I am very surprised by that. Is that an officially allowed policy? Or is it something that is "don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness"?
    - nielsbjerg 8y ago
      How so? What was going to be controlled, by whom?
      - 8_hours_ago 8y ago
        I assumed that Microsoft has security policies to ensure that all confidential information (e.g. non-open-source code and strategic discussions) is stored on infrastructure controlled by Microsoft. The company I work at is very careful about keeping our intellectual property on our infrastructure, and I am surprised that a larger company like Microsoft doesn't have similar policies.
        jethro_tell 8y ago
        Maybe info sec drove the decision to purchase github because that was the easier way to reign in the data leak. =)
        com2kid 8y ago
- hesk 8y ago
  Github offers an enterprise version and I know of at least one big company which hosts their code there.
- nerdponx 8y ago
  Note that this doesn't preclude the possibility of an on-prem Enterprise Github setup.
ionforce 8y ago
FAANG, I've never seen this before! Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google?
- lbotos 8y ago
  Correct, It's often used in modern context when talking about what stock is powering the market right now. It's a "FAANG" market. EDIT: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/faang-stocks.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/faang-stocks.asp
  - marssaxman 8y ago
    Oh, it's a stock thing? It makes more sense as Wall Street slang - in terms of the technological landscape, one of those companies is so obviously dissimilar to the others that the phrase makes little sense.
- CydeWeys 8y ago
  I don't understand by what metric Netflix is included but Microsoft is excluded. It should really be FAAMG, or maybe FAMANG.
  - timv 8y ago
    Well in this very specific context, it's hard to imagine that Microsoft will be avoiding using GitHub just because it's owned by Microsoft.
    - CydeWeys 8y ago
      FAANG is used very generally to refer to these five companies. It's not just in this specific context. I'm wondering why Microsoft is excluded.
      - AlexCoventry 8y ago
        If you include MS, you have to also include IBM. FAMAING.
CydeWeys 8y ago
As an owner of several Google org repos on GitHub, I can vouch that this is definitely true. Only open sourced code goes into GitHub. Private repos are only used for staging purposes thereof, i.e. getting a release of open source code ready prior to the world visibility bit being flipped. We would definitely never store our proprietary code on systems run by anyone else, regardless of who runs/owns them.

They already did. Except maybe for test setups and to configure a project before announcing it. All those companies keep their privates private. GitHub is just a public showroom for them. Again this is different for other/smaller companies.

diminoten 8y ago
Ah, I think that's how it's always been. What's the difference between me running my small company out of Azure, and keeping the source code in GitHub, now that Microsoft owns it? Nothing changes immediately for any of us, to me the biggest concern is what happens after those roadmapped projects have run through. What goes next on that roadmap, and will it stick to the principles I love about GitHub, or will it start to veer into Microsoft's territory?

SiVal 8y ago

Bigger tech companies not only do not host important private source code on Github but won't even host on outsourced physical servers. Where I've worked (incl. well-known names), information that we wanted spread to the world could be hosted on trusted external systems (trust still mattered to keep it from being "edited"), but non-public info was always hosted inside a physical building that we owned watched 24/7 by human guards we employed.

hirsin 8y ago
Not entirely true. Microsoft puts (almost? Yet to find anything that isn't) all our code on VSTS which is accessible remotely, without VPN. I've checked in a (very very minor docs) fix to the Windows code base from my Android phone over LTE.
- electronvolt 8y ago
  Yeah, which is hosted on Azure, a data center that Microsoft owns and employs guards for, and secured behind our standard corporate authentication. :) (Source: I work at Microsoft, near the VSTS team.)
  - com2kid 8y ago
    > Yeah, which is hosted on Azure, a data center that Microsoft owns and employs guards for, and secured behind our standard corporate authentication. :) Way back when, Microsoft used to host a bunch of auth servers for banks. A friend of mine mentioned an armed guard in front of the data center for that particular service. I've worked on teams at MS where there was a (non-armed) guard checking everyone who got off the elevator, but before I joined MS I was once left alone in a room full of computers open to the Windows source tree, wearing my "do not leave guest unattended" badge. Mileage might vary and all that.
    - electronvolt 8y ago
      Yeah, all I was really saying was that the grandparent's comment and the parent's comment weren't in opposition. Microsoft owns the data center the code lives in and certainly takes care of physical security.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- SiVal 8y ago
  That's amazing. Contrast that to my friend who works on code at Apple that's so guarded that he can't even access it from Apple HQ. He has to travel to his office in an unmarked Apple bldg several miles from HQ (in an unmarked van) and access the code from inside the bldg. Any attempt to work on his code outside that bldg, on the Apple employee shuttle for example, will result in immediate firing with possible criminal charges. Admittedly, that's not the usual Apple employee, but the contrast between that and Microsoft's, which may as well be hosted on a set of Chinese night market DVDs, is LOL-worthy.
phillipcarter 8y ago
MS employee here: Long before the acquisition, we've been hosting important stuff in private GitHub repositories. Including having strategic discussions in those private repositories. We've also done a lot of that stuff in public too. Some might say a bit too much, given that we've had things leaked and/or misinterpreted w.r.t product direction in the past. I still agree with your point, but I believe more of this sort of thing is happening. Lots of stuff that has no real reason to be private is just being open source by default.
- 8_hours_ago 8y ago
  > Long before the acquisition, we've been hosting important stuff in private GitHub repositories. Including having strategic discussions in those private repositories. Wow! I am very surprised by that. Is that an officially allowed policy? Or is it something that is "don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness"?
  - nielsbjerg 8y ago
    How so? What was going to be controlled, by whom?
    - 8_hours_ago 8y ago
      I assumed that Microsoft has security policies to ensure that all confidential information (e.g. non-open-source code and strategic discussions) is stored on infrastructure controlled by Microsoft. The company I work at is very careful about keeping our intellectual property on our infrastructure, and I am surprised that a larger company like Microsoft doesn't have similar policies.
      - jethro_tell 8y ago
        Maybe info sec drove the decision to purchase github because that was the easier way to reign in the data leak. =)
      - com2kid 8y ago
hesk 8y ago
Github offers an enterprise version and I know of at least one big company which hosts their code there.
nerdponx 8y ago
Note that this doesn't preclude the possibility of an on-prem Enterprise Github setup.

ionforce 8y ago

FAANG, I've never seen this before! Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google?

lbotos 8y ago
Correct, It's often used in modern context when talking about what stock is powering the market right now. It's a "FAANG" market. EDIT: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/faang-stocks.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/faang-stocks.asp
- marssaxman 8y ago
  Oh, it's a stock thing? It makes more sense as Wall Street slang - in terms of the technological landscape, one of those companies is so obviously dissimilar to the others that the phrase makes little sense.
CydeWeys 8y ago
I don't understand by what metric Netflix is included but Microsoft is excluded. It should really be FAAMG, or maybe FAMANG.
- timv 8y ago
  Well in this very specific context, it's hard to imagine that Microsoft will be avoiding using GitHub just because it's owned by Microsoft.
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    FAANG is used very generally to refer to these five companies. It's not just in this specific context. I'm wondering why Microsoft is excluded.
    - AlexCoventry 8y ago
      If you include MS, you have to also include IBM. FAMAING.

CydeWeys 8y ago

As an owner of several Google org repos on GitHub, I can vouch that this is definitely true. Only open sourced code goes into GitHub. Private repos are only used for staging purposes thereof, i.e. getting a release of open source code ready prior to the world visibility bit being flipped. We would definitely never store our proprietary code on systems run by anyone else, regardless of who runs/owns them.