4 ms·

My first thought is who needs "social" features in an enterprise VCS? I love GitHub and think it's biggest benefit is the ability to {easily} fork and watch pr

by Corrado 15y ago

My first thought is who needs "social" features in an enterprise VCS? I love GitHub and think it's biggest benefit is the ability to {easily} fork and watch projects. Does this really translate to the enterprise? I can't imagine a corporation where its a good think to have two groups disagreeing on a direction and causing a fork. Management would have a cow! The bottom line is what does GitHub Enterprise buy my over something like Redmine or Gitorious? GHE is probably easier to install but I still have to manage my own hardware & drive space. And with the open source alternatives I don't have to worry about licensing and can crack it open to add adapters to other software (#include "standard open source header").

bengl3rt 15y ago
I can think of at least one fairly large development organization that has moved to the github model internally - with pull requests and everything. Their developers love it.
taylorbuley 15y ago
On my team at Forbes we're doing our code reviews via pull requests on Gitorious. The changeset is all there, and you can click a line of code to leave a comment about that line, and there are revisions. It's great. One thing that I believe this product will have that Gitorious does not (to my knowledge) is the ability to create pull requests from branch to branch. The only way I've found for creating pull requests in Gitorious is to clone the whole repo. Not a huge deal, but it would be easier to just to do branch and merge vs. fork and pull (then branch and merge) for smaller changes.
RowanH 15y ago
So on a team I manage, we've used github::fi (github enterprise looks to be the next evolution) for the past year. If you don't have an option to put code out onto github.com, then it's great to essentially have github.com inhouse - minus of course all the public repos. We find it's the developers go-to place, so using the wiki along with where the source is hosted, is fantastic. As a dev team manager, I love the browsing the codebase via the web browser, reviewing what's going on in the code base instead of pulling down code locally. From a customer, if you've got the funds, and can't go with github.com hosted, then it's the next best thing. It's been rock solid.
- Corrado 15y ago
  Yea, but my point stands that something like Redmine would fulfill your requirements and be open source. It has a wiki that is tied into the Git repo, and a (better) issue tracking system, and browser access to source, etc. I guess I'm just missing why an Enterprise would spend $$$ when they can get everything they need without $$$. Then again, I'm not a bean counter and I guess I just don't understand how budgets work. :/
  - RowanH 15y ago
    A big part of it, is everyone is familiar with github.com, it's exactly the same experience with github::fi. Just business as usual in-house. For development teams that are open source based, pretty much everyone knows github, so the 'feel at home' factor is there. VS getting yet another tool in the mix that you have to get people upto speed on.

by Corrado 15y ago

bengl3rt 15y ago

I can think of at least one fairly large development organization that has moved to the github model internally - with pull requests and everything. Their developers love it.

taylorbuley 15y ago

On my team at Forbes we're doing our code reviews via pull requests on Gitorious. The changeset is all there, and you can click a line of code to leave a comment about that line, and there are revisions. It's great. One thing that I believe this product will have that Gitorious does not (to my knowledge) is the ability to create pull requests from branch to branch. The only way I've found for creating pull requests in Gitorious is to clone the whole repo. Not a huge deal, but it would be easier to just to do branch and merge vs. fork and pull (then branch and merge) for smaller changes.

RowanH 15y ago

So on a team I manage, we've used github::fi (github enterprise looks to be the next evolution) for the past year. If you don't have an option to put code out onto github.com, then it's great to essentially have github.com inhouse - minus of course all the public repos. We find it's the developers go-to place, so using the wiki along with where the source is hosted, is fantastic. As a dev team manager, I love the browsing the codebase via the web browser, reviewing what's going on in the code base instead of pulling down code locally. From a customer, if you've got the funds, and can't go with github.com hosted, then it's the next best thing. It's been rock solid.

Corrado 15y ago
Yea, but my point stands that something like Redmine would fulfill your requirements and be open source. It has a wiki that is tied into the Git repo, and a (better) issue tracking system, and browser access to source, etc. I guess I'm just missing why an Enterprise would spend $$$ when they can get everything they need without $$$. Then again, I'm not a bean counter and I guess I just don't understand how budgets work. :/
- RowanH 15y ago
  A big part of it, is everyone is familiar with github.com, it's exactly the same experience with github::fi. Just business as usual in-house. For development teams that are open source based, pretty much everyone knows github, so the 'feel at home' factor is there. VS getting yet another tool in the mix that you have to get people upto speed on.