6 ms·

That's the trick, the git is open, but the metadata is what matters. Issues, PRs, integrations into various code auditing services. That's the whole "extend" bi

That's the trick, the git is open, but the metadata is what matters. Issues, PRs, integrations into various code auditing services. That's the whole "extend" bit.

munk-a 5y ago
That is somewhat fair - there aren't great alternatives to migrate issues and the like to today. But all of those bits of metadata are easy to pull out of the service via API hooks. If someone wanted to start a serious competitor to github that shares the same basic data model it'd be pretty trivial to write up migration aides. I don't disbelieve that it's possible for microsoft to severely restrict these - but entirely removing them is off the table unless they cut out a lot of value. Inter-service communication to third party review tools and CI/CD tools all depend strongly on those API hooks.
- merpnderp 5y ago
  > If someone wanted to start a serious competitor to github that shares the same basic data model it'd be pretty trivial to write up migration aides. Like Gitlab? I assumed Gitlab would dominate after the MS purchase of Github, but I was incorrect that people wouldn't want to trust their data and personal projects to the epic abusers of privacy that is Microsoft.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    Well I don't think the personal projects are really a significant factor in terms of where MS's paychecks are coming from - they care more about the commercial subscribers. And, speaking as someone employed at a commercial subscriber, objecting to continuing to use github due to the microsoft acquisition when we use office for pretty much all document production is going to be a pretty hard argument.
- gmueckl 5y ago
  There are really simple ways to play dirty with APIs like making sure that they are incomplete in subtle and inconvenient ways like leaving out some of the metadata. Hypothetical example: make it impossible to query tags on issues. You'd still be able to do most things through the API, but if you have a workflow that's heavily dependent on tags, the data is effectively siloed.
  - maccard 5y ago
    So to be clear, the proof the GitHub is extending is a hypothetical example of an incomplete api that is not based on an open standard?
    - gmueckl 5y ago
      I didn't want to prove anything. I just pointed out what is possible.
      - maccard 5y ago
        Sorry, I misread the username and assumed you were the commentor I replied to. Yes, these things are _possible_ but there is no evidence or indication that they are happening with Github.
        gmueckl 5y ago
        I agree that there are no signs at the moment. Companies change over time, so a certain risk - however small - is present, as with all 3rd party services.
whichquestion 5y ago
Are there any foss initiatives to making these metadata bits portable?
- harryvederci 5y ago
  https://fossil-scm.org/ https://fossil-scm.org/
treis 5y ago
What is going to be extinguished?
maccard 5y ago
By that logic any proprietary product that provides an interface with an open source tool is guilty. I think accusing MS of EEE in this case is a huge stretch; GitHub is a commercial product that uses a popular open source tool with 100% compatibility (that I'm aware of) and actively participates in the development and features of that tool. When Ms start implementing extensions to git that only work with GitHub, we can point fingers but accusing them of extending git to extinguish based on pull requests is baseless
- fartcannon 5y ago
  there's never a stretch with Microsoft. It is always, and has always been the same play. You can make excuses all you like, but in the end they will attemtp to embrace, extend and extinguish all competition.
  - maccard 5y ago
    Wheh they show any signs of extending git, or extinguishing any other open source competitors, I will be standing there with you calling them out. Until then, they're developing an excellent product that people want to use, built with open tooling
    - blacktriangle 5y ago
      Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.
      - maccard 5y ago
        I'm arguing against soundbytes here, which is really unfortunate and something I hoped would be above HN. It's very easy to shut down an argument with a soundbyte or a famous quote when you don't have any actual proof that history is repeating itself. The situation and landscape is _very_ different from the mid 90s, Microsoft are showing _no_ indication of being bad actors whatsoever, (in fact they're showing the exact opposite) and haven't done for at least a decade.

That's the trick, the git is open, but the metadata is what matters. Issues, PRs, integrations into various code auditing services. That's the whole "extend" bit.

munk-a 5y ago

That is somewhat fair - there aren't great alternatives to migrate issues and the like to today. But all of those bits of metadata are easy to pull out of the service via API hooks. If someone wanted to start a serious competitor to github that shares the same basic data model it'd be pretty trivial to write up migration aides. I don't disbelieve that it's possible for microsoft to severely restrict these - but entirely removing them is off the table unless they cut out a lot of value. Inter-service communication to third party review tools and CI/CD tools all depend strongly on those API hooks.

merpnderp 5y ago
> If someone wanted to start a serious competitor to github that shares the same basic data model it'd be pretty trivial to write up migration aides. Like Gitlab? I assumed Gitlab would dominate after the MS purchase of Github, but I was incorrect that people wouldn't want to trust their data and personal projects to the epic abusers of privacy that is Microsoft.
- munk-a 5y ago
  Well I don't think the personal projects are really a significant factor in terms of where MS's paychecks are coming from - they care more about the commercial subscribers. And, speaking as someone employed at a commercial subscriber, objecting to continuing to use github due to the microsoft acquisition when we use office for pretty much all document production is going to be a pretty hard argument.
gmueckl 5y ago
There are really simple ways to play dirty with APIs like making sure that they are incomplete in subtle and inconvenient ways like leaving out some of the metadata. Hypothetical example: make it impossible to query tags on issues. You'd still be able to do most things through the API, but if you have a workflow that's heavily dependent on tags, the data is effectively siloed.
- maccard 5y ago
  So to be clear, the proof the GitHub is extending is a hypothetical example of an incomplete api that is not based on an open standard?
  - gmueckl 5y ago
    I didn't want to prove anything. I just pointed out what is possible.
    - maccard 5y ago
      Sorry, I misread the username and assumed you were the commentor I replied to. Yes, these things are _possible_ but there is no evidence or indication that they are happening with Github.
      - gmueckl 5y ago
        I agree that there are no signs at the moment. Companies change over time, so a certain risk - however small - is present, as with all 3rd party services.

whichquestion 5y ago

Are there any foss initiatives to making these metadata bits portable?

harryvederci 5y ago
https://fossil-scm.org/ https://fossil-scm.org/

treis 5y ago

What is going to be extinguished?

maccard 5y ago

By that logic any proprietary product that provides an interface with an open source tool is guilty. I think accusing MS of EEE in this case is a huge stretch; GitHub is a commercial product that uses a popular open source tool with 100% compatibility (that I'm aware of) and actively participates in the development and features of that tool. When Ms start implementing extensions to git that only work with GitHub, we can point fingers but accusing them of extending git to extinguish based on pull requests is baseless

fartcannon 5y ago
there's never a stretch with Microsoft. It is always, and has always been the same play. You can make excuses all you like, but in the end they will attemtp to embrace, extend and extinguish all competition.
- maccard 5y ago
  Wheh they show any signs of extending git, or extinguishing any other open source competitors, I will be standing there with you calling them out. Until then, they're developing an excellent product that people want to use, built with open tooling
  - blacktriangle 5y ago
    Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.
    - maccard 5y ago
      I'm arguing against soundbytes here, which is really unfortunate and something I hoped would be above HN. It's very easy to shut down an argument with a soundbyte or a famous quote when you don't have any actual proof that history is repeating itself. The situation and landscape is _very_ different from the mid 90s, Microsoft are showing _no_ indication of being bad actors whatsoever, (in fact they're showing the exact opposite) and haven't done for at least a decade.