4 ms·

Your other points are useful but I find the below questionable and counterproductive: > - Disable the ability to fork repos in your organization If someone ca

by 3np 3y ago

Your other points are useful but I find the below questionable and counterproductive: > - Disable the ability to fork repos in your organization If someone can read it, they can trivially fork it (clone locally, then republish as new repo). The only thing you're preventing with this advice is the free discoverability and tracking of forks which you get with forks created with the GitHub "fork" button. The forks are still there but now you have a harder time finding them.

bluGill 3y ago
But now it becomes a harder mistake to make. Creating a new repository is easy, but not so easy you would do it by accident. Importantly when this is discovered you can fire the person who did it, and they can't say it's was an accident, while the fork button to the wrong place is potentially an accident.
- masklinn 3y ago
  I’d say it becomes much easier: if you fork a private repository, you need to go through multiple layers of warning to move it to public. If you want a collaboration repository with forking disabled, public is the default.
- chrisfosterelli 3y ago
  You can't accidentally share a private fork any easier than you could a new repo. If you try to make a private fork public in GitHub there is just a message that "For security reasons, you cannot change the visibility of a fork." As far as I know the article's example of 'a developer forks a private repo and makes it public' is not possible in github.
blackoil 3y ago
The idea is to protect against accidental sharing. A rogue employee can simply take dump and share on 4Chan no matter what tools you use.
- Y_Y 3y ago
  As long as they don't take the dump on company time the developer should retain any intellectual property rights regarding photos they take of it.
- 3np 3y ago
  Forks of private repos are similarly private by default, with some hoops and warnings before you can extend it. I still dont see how that recommendation brings any benefits in this regard.

by 3np 3y ago

bluGill 3y ago

But now it becomes a harder mistake to make. Creating a new repository is easy, but not so easy you would do it by accident. Importantly when this is discovered you can fire the person who did it, and they can't say it's was an accident, while the fork button to the wrong place is potentially an accident.

masklinn 3y ago
I’d say it becomes much easier: if you fork a private repository, you need to go through multiple layers of warning to move it to public. If you want a collaboration repository with forking disabled, public is the default.
chrisfosterelli 3y ago
You can't accidentally share a private fork any easier than you could a new repo. If you try to make a private fork public in GitHub there is just a message that "For security reasons, you cannot change the visibility of a fork." As far as I know the article's example of 'a developer forks a private repo and makes it public' is not possible in github.

blackoil 3y ago

The idea is to protect against accidental sharing. A rogue employee can simply take dump and share on 4Chan no matter what tools you use.

Y_Y 3y ago
As long as they don't take the dump on company time the developer should retain any intellectual property rights regarding photos they take of it.
3np 3y ago
Forks of private repos are similarly private by default, with some hoops and warnings before you can extend it. I still dont see how that recommendation brings any benefits in this regard.