5 ms·

Watch those hands, we are at the "extend" phase [0]. Then there will be bait-and-switch move, and voila, Github is not working with git client, just with their

Watch those hands, we are at the "extend" phase [0]. Then there will be bait-and-switch move, and voila, Github is not working with git client, just with their own shell. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

wilg 6y ago
How do you know the difference between being in an EEE scenario versus just being in a scenario where people keep working on their product?
- whatgoodisaroad 6y ago
  When the open components that allow free interoperability with GitHub's competitors are replaced with proprietary components that don't.
  - wilg 6y ago
    Did that happen?
- coliveira 6y ago
  Just look at history.
  - wilg 6y ago
    Does that mean it _always_ happens? Or only sometimes?
coliveira 6y ago
And in a few iterations they will label git as "legacy".
mikorym 6y ago
I think the simple way of passive resistance is calling it "Microsoft GitHub".
- SergeAx 6y ago
  Good idea, gonna use it, thanks!
chadly 6y ago
This is a tired take. Can a company not legitimately improve their product/offering without this being accused at them? If you are referring to GH being owned by MS now, it's 2020 for godsake. Can we move on from our fathers' trauma? MS has been damn good lately in support of developers and developer tools.
- Klonoar 6y ago
  I get just as tired of reading this take as the next person, but I don't necessarily think we should do away with it - it'd be akin to ignoring history. I personally remain very uncomfortable with how massive GitHub has become and how ~99% of software development happens on the platform.
  - cycloptic 6y ago
    Looking at the history in the wikipedia article that was linked in the GP post, none of the executives who used that phrase are with the company anymore.
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    There isn't much lock-in yet though. If you wanted to move a project from github to gitlab, you could move the code over with a few commands. Open issues and stuff could be moved over with a script. There isn't much 'network effect' that means your project would die on other hosting.
    - Klonoar 6y ago
      This is classic "it could be built in a weekend" syndrome, and I think we're all intelligent enough on this site to know that it's simply not true. Furthermore, technology isn't the lock-in - it's the network, which you can't drag as easily.
- whatgoodisaroad 6y ago
  To me, this isn't a real counterexample, even at the height of MS's EEE, it was never at the expense of developer tooling, it was at the expense of openness. In fact, improving developer experience was the primary lever MS used to achieve it.
tus88 6y ago
And wait until they claim it is to "improve the user experience" because they care about their users so much they need to protect them from the free and familiar tools they are used to.
rasengan0 6y ago
This may be relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24420307 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24420307

wilg 6y ago

How do you know the difference between being in an EEE scenario versus just being in a scenario where people keep working on their product?

whatgoodisaroad 6y ago
When the open components that allow free interoperability with GitHub's competitors are replaced with proprietary components that don't.
- wilg 6y ago
  Did that happen?
coliveira 6y ago
Just look at history.
- wilg 6y ago
  Does that mean it _always_ happens? Or only sometimes?

coliveira 6y ago

And in a few iterations they will label git as "legacy".

mikorym 6y ago

I think the simple way of passive resistance is calling it "Microsoft GitHub".

SergeAx 6y ago
Good idea, gonna use it, thanks!

chadly 6y ago

This is a tired take. Can a company not legitimately improve their product/offering without this being accused at them? If you are referring to GH being owned by MS now, it's 2020 for godsake. Can we move on from our fathers' trauma? MS has been damn good lately in support of developers and developer tools.

Klonoar 6y ago
I get just as tired of reading this take as the next person, but I don't necessarily think we should do away with it - it'd be akin to ignoring history. I personally remain very uncomfortable with how massive GitHub has become and how ~99% of software development happens on the platform.
- cycloptic 6y ago
  Looking at the history in the wikipedia article that was linked in the GP post, none of the executives who used that phrase are with the company anymore.
- londons_explore 6y ago
  There isn't much lock-in yet though. If you wanted to move a project from github to gitlab, you could move the code over with a few commands. Open issues and stuff could be moved over with a script. There isn't much 'network effect' that means your project would die on other hosting.
  - Klonoar 6y ago
    This is classic "it could be built in a weekend" syndrome, and I think we're all intelligent enough on this site to know that it's simply not true. Furthermore, technology isn't the lock-in - it's the network, which you can't drag as easily.
whatgoodisaroad 6y ago
To me, this isn't a real counterexample, even at the height of MS's EEE, it was never at the expense of developer tooling, it was at the expense of openness. In fact, improving developer experience was the primary lever MS used to achieve it.

tus88 6y ago

And wait until they claim it is to "improve the user experience" because they care about their users so much they need to protect them from the free and familiar tools they are used to.

rasengan0 6y ago

This may be relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24420307 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24420307