5 ms·

Makes sense. Google runs a mono-repo. Microsoft ran codeplex[2]. Microsoft wanted to be in Github's space but couldn't compete, so bought the space. [1]: http

Makes sense. Google runs a mono-repo. Microsoft ran codeplex[2]. Microsoft wanted to be in Github's space but couldn't compete, so bought the space. [1]: https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2016/7/204032-why-google-stores-billions-of-lines-of-code-in-a-single-repository/fulltext https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2016/7/204032-why-google-stor... [2]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CodePlex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CodePlex

theklr 8y ago
A little oversimplified, but sure.
foepys 8y ago
Microsoft is currently running Visual Studio Team Services [1]. We will see what will happen with that. 1: https://www.visualstudio.com/de/team-services/ https://www.visualstudio.com/de/team-services/
- dharmab 8y ago
  A lot of Microsoft uses GitHub too. For example, a lot of Azure's tooling is developed on GitHub, likely because it's easier to engage with users.
  - meko 8y ago
    I read somewhere that they have more repos combined than any other company.
swyx 8y ago
> Microsoft wanted to be in Github's space but couldn't compete i just wanna take that in for a moment. when freaking Microsoft can't compete with you on enterprise software... you've done well.
louthy 8y ago
They also have Visual Studio Profiles/Visual Studio Team Services, which appeared to be them trying to enter the space, but, bar people being forced to have a profile to use VS I doubt many are using the team or project features of that. Then there's one of their dev cash cows: Team Foundation Server, which I assume has been dying a slow death over the past few years due to git dominance in the source control space. I moved my team away from the shit show which is TFS for git (not github) several years back now. So, I suspect this is shoring up their position, reducing the number of man ours needed in competing, and buying the best product on the market. I wouldn't be surprised if github got more enterprise project management features, where it's a bit light right now, and perhaps more around management of super large projects. As well as tighter integration with Visual Studio (at the project management level, rather than just the source control level) - to phase out TFS over time.
- gokhan 8y ago
  > moved my team away from the shit show which is TFS for git (not github) TFS also supports git repositories. Do you use TFVC (Team Foundation Version Control) and TFS interchangeably?
  - louthy 8y ago
    We left TFS altogether because it was just so terrible, I've lost count of the number of hours lost to that software. We use Gitlab for source control now, Team City for builds, and Target Process for project management.
- Spearchucker 8y ago
  TFS is used in every single corporate I've worked for, for the last I don't know, 10 maybe 12 years?
  - louthy 8y ago
    Perhaps there was some hyperbole in my statement, a more measured statement would be: I suspect that the more modern alternatives to TFS are perhaps starting to create a dent in the TFS cash cow, and M$ are hedging their position. Perhaps with an end goal of some interoperability, or full scale integration of github into TFS over time. Obviously this is all speculation, only M$ knows why they did it, but it seems like a good bet if they want to be providers of SaaS solutions and one of their existing solutions is under threat.
munificent 8y ago
> Google runs a mono-repo. Microsoft ran codeplex[2]. I guess everyone already forgot about code.google.com.
cptskippy 8y ago
> Microsoft wanted to be in Github's space but couldn't compete Did they though? Codeplex predated Github by 2 years and I don't recall there ever being much competition between the two. If anything I think Stackoverflow and Nuget played bigger roles in obviating Codeplex. Codeplex was launched as a community platform for hosting Windows based opensource projects and libraries. It had forums, bug tracking, and all sorts of niceties but Stackoverflow showed up a couple years after it's launch and became the defacto destination for community support. Around the same time Nuget landed and removed the need for most consumer developers to even visit Codeplex. GitHub showed up the same time as SO and Nuget and was largely a platform agnostic way to host opensource libraries but wasn't any more appealing than Codeplex to Windows Devs at the time. Since Nuget became the primary means for Windows Devs to consume libraries and Nuget packages could be hosted on any webserver, there was never a driving reason to use Codeplex or Github. Microsoft launched Visual Studio Online for enterprises three years later without even farting in Codeplex's general direction. A couple years later they added support for Git to Visual Studio and have been moving people to use it for version control over their proprietary solution ever since. I think Microsoft's purchase of Github wasn't so much to control or insert itself into Open Source, but rather to protect itself from others who might trying to push them out.

theklr 8y ago

A little oversimplified, but sure.

foepys 8y ago

Microsoft is currently running Visual Studio Team Services [1]. We will see what will happen with that. 1: https://www.visualstudio.com/de/team-services/ https://www.visualstudio.com/de/team-services/

dharmab 8y ago
A lot of Microsoft uses GitHub too. For example, a lot of Azure's tooling is developed on GitHub, likely because it's easier to engage with users.
- meko 8y ago
  I read somewhere that they have more repos combined than any other company.

swyx 8y ago

> Microsoft wanted to be in Github's space but couldn't compete i just wanna take that in for a moment. when freaking Microsoft can't compete with you on enterprise software... you've done well.

louthy 8y ago

They also have Visual Studio Profiles/Visual Studio Team Services, which appeared to be them trying to enter the space, but, bar people being forced to have a profile to use VS I doubt many are using the team or project features of that. Then there's one of their dev cash cows: Team Foundation Server, which I assume has been dying a slow death over the past few years due to git dominance in the source control space. I moved my team away from the shit show which is TFS for git (not github) several years back now. So, I suspect this is shoring up their position, reducing the number of man ours needed in competing, and buying the best product on the market. I wouldn't be surprised if github got more enterprise project management features, where it's a bit light right now, and perhaps more around management of super large projects. As well as tighter integration with Visual Studio (at the project management level, rather than just the source control level) - to phase out TFS over time.

gokhan 8y ago
> moved my team away from the shit show which is TFS for git (not github) TFS also supports git repositories. Do you use TFVC (Team Foundation Version Control) and TFS interchangeably?
- louthy 8y ago
  We left TFS altogether because it was just so terrible, I've lost count of the number of hours lost to that software. We use Gitlab for source control now, Team City for builds, and Target Process for project management.
Spearchucker 8y ago
TFS is used in every single corporate I've worked for, for the last I don't know, 10 maybe 12 years?
- louthy 8y ago
  Perhaps there was some hyperbole in my statement, a more measured statement would be: I suspect that the more modern alternatives to TFS are perhaps starting to create a dent in the TFS cash cow, and M$ are hedging their position. Perhaps with an end goal of some interoperability, or full scale integration of github into TFS over time. Obviously this is all speculation, only M$ knows why they did it, but it seems like a good bet if they want to be providers of SaaS solutions and one of their existing solutions is under threat.

munificent 8y ago

> Google runs a mono-repo. Microsoft ran codeplex[2]. I guess everyone already forgot about code.google.com.

cptskippy 8y ago

> Microsoft wanted to be in Github's space but couldn't compete Did they though? Codeplex predated Github by 2 years and I don't recall there ever being much competition between the two. If anything I think Stackoverflow and Nuget played bigger roles in obviating Codeplex. Codeplex was launched as a community platform for hosting Windows based opensource projects and libraries. It had forums, bug tracking, and all sorts of niceties but Stackoverflow showed up a couple years after it's launch and became the defacto destination for community support. Around the same time Nuget landed and removed the need for most consumer developers to even visit Codeplex. GitHub showed up the same time as SO and Nuget and was largely a platform agnostic way to host opensource libraries but wasn't any more appealing than Codeplex to Windows Devs at the time. Since Nuget became the primary means for Windows Devs to consume libraries and Nuget packages could be hosted on any webserver, there was never a driving reason to use Codeplex or Github. Microsoft launched Visual Studio Online for enterprises three years later without even farting in Codeplex's general direction. A couple years later they added support for Git to Visual Studio and have been moving people to use it for version control over their proprietary solution ever since. I think Microsoft's purchase of Github wasn't so much to control or insert itself into Open Source, but rather to protect itself from others who might trying to push them out.