12 ms·
Is there a way to opt out of this? I’m not sure I want my code to be stored forever in a glacier with no way of deleting it.
by beokop 7y ago
Is there a way to opt out of this? I’m not sure I want my code to be stored forever in a glacier with no way of deleting it.
- toomuchtodo 7y agoMake your repo private might be one way.
- shantly 7y agoAccording to their selection criteria, low-activity public repos without many stars will also be skipped. So, "share only code no-one cares about and don't work on it much" seems to also be an option.
- wolco 7y agoThat's sad I was hoping future ai-data bots would see my non-popular non-useful code and use it.
- beokop 7y agoThat’s probably what I’ll end up doing for most repos. Unfortunately.
- darkwater 7y agoBut... why? Does your privacy really exist when you have been dead for a 500 years? Being purely practical I mean.
- jedieaston 7y agoIf you have public GitHub repos, people crawl them all of the time. I've seen at least three top-of-HN articles that say something like: "I scripted through 10 billion LOC on GitHub, here's a bunch of passwords", or something to that effect. Just set your repo to private if you don't want it in the vault, and if it's open source anyway, who cares?
- beokop 7y agoThen why have the option to delete public repos at all? Public tweets? If we had the means, should the web as a whole be append-only? There’s a big difference between “public” and “stored in a glacier forever”.
- saagarjha 7y ago> Then why have the option to delete public repos at all? So you can feel better?
- afiori 7y agoThere is an important choice in deleting a public repo, even it has been archived elsewhere. At the very least you are no longer claiming that it fits your criteria of public portfolio.
- ocdtrekkie 7y agoHonestly, I would argue "stored in a glacier forever" is drastically more private than anything you've ever set to "public". The number of people who can actually get to and read that data is incredibly minimal.
- beokop 7y agoThere’s no reason to believe they won’t have an online copy of the 2020 snapshot too. Isn’t that kind of the point? For future generations to be able to use it?
- ocdtrekkie 7y agoThe online copy is... GitHub itself. Which is current and up-to-date, and you can continue to remove your data from. The 2020 snapshot is useful historically... like a time capsule. There's no reason to invest the resources in keeping it online. And if it was online, it would have major regulatory problems, such as GDPR. So there's a lot of reason to believe the 2020 snapshot won't also be online.
- Exuma 7y agoYes because 9000 bots in China haven't already done that to your public repo...
- tjr 7y agoI'm thinking I might want to opt in. What should I add to GitHub before February, to make sure it gets in the archive?
- sitkack 7y agoMake sure it has a license attached such that GH recognizes it.
- celeritascelery 7y agoNothing. So long as it’s active, it will get archived.
- heyoni 7y agoRick roll in the shell, obviously.
- chrisseaton 7y agoIf it's already public then how do you know people aren't already archiving it?
- julianmetcalf 7y agoHi, Julia here, the PM for the Archive Program at GitHub. Yes, you will be able to opt out of the program. One option is to make your repo private, as only active public repos will be archived. If you don’t wish to make your repo private please contact support at support.github.com.
- marmada 7y agoOut of curiosity, what would you want to opt out?
- ris 7y agoSure - just let me take a fork first...
- thrownaway954 7y agoYou do know that if anyone has forked your project, they have a complete copy of your work. That said, if they don't opt out... well then I guess your work IS going to be archived.