4 ms·

I think we already give Github far too much influence over the free software world without also paying attention to who they see fit to hand awards to. I wonde

I think we already give Github far too much influence over the free software world without also paying attention to who they see fit to hand awards to. I wonder whether Github would have considered the PSF to be "wonderfully welcoming" if they hadn't switched from their self-hosted bug tracker to Github's offering last year. Personally I don't find being asked to read [1] before I can submit a bug report at all welcoming. [1] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-of-service https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t...

ploum 3y ago
Indeed. The fact that nobody seems concerned about Github/Microsoft monopoly is concerning to say the least. https://ploum.net/2023-02-22-leaving-github.html https://ploum.net/2023-02-22-leaving-github.html
- dcgudeman 3y ago
  Really confused why people don't seem to use the term "monopoly" correctly. Monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service. Github does not have in any sense exclusive possession or control of hosted version control. It is a popular choice, that's it.
  - kstrauser 3y ago
    I agree. GitHub is the biggest player, but it's a pretty layer on top of an inherently distributed system. If I get tired of Microsoft's shenanigans, I can pack up move to a competitor with only the normal amount of friction (like moving bug reports over, etc.). I use Gitea for my personal projects and it handles 95% of the code-hosting bits just as well.
    - mjw1007 3y ago
      I'm not so relaxed about how easy it will be to move to a new issue tracker. When you're moving from a self-hosted system to a proprietary system, you can do the work yourself to make sure there are redirects from the old URLs to the new ones. That option isn't likely to be available when you're moving the other way. I observe that github is happy for you to "bring your own domain" for github pages, but AIUI issue and PR URLs are always under github.com .
      - kstrauser 3y ago
        Maintaining links is going to be a pain in the neck, sure. I don't mean to make light of it. However, that's kind of inherent with going from one service to another, and not something GitHub's doing to make it artificially harder.
- mjw1007 3y ago
  I agree. I'm not, at this stage, tremendously worried about Microsoft finding ways to use its control of Github to get its own way in some kind of conflict. I am worried about what happens if, or when, Github's owners decide it's time to stop caring about having a good reputation and instead squeeze it for as much profit as possible (what we seem to be calling "enshittification" these days). Pointing git remotes somewhere different shouldn't be a huge pain, but all those issue trackers are a different matter.
ryanianian 3y ago
> we already give Github far too much influence over the free software Yup. I was at GitHub Universe last week. It's very clear GitHub (Microsoft) is trying to become like AWS but for the SDLC instead of for runtime. Soon we'll all be using GitHub full-time to do all our coding in the browser with integrated runtime envs and CI and AI along for the ride. You get a taste with some fancy OSS demo projects which they do legitimately support. Then you want to integrate with those OSS libraries, so you have to dip your toes into GitHub's ecosystem. And if you want updates and security and to not have public repos ... then time to pony up. GitHub does support OSS in real ways, but it's pretty obviously a loss-leading marketing / freemium strategy. It's not surprising they give themslves a pat on the back - it's marketing after all. This is not a bad or even amoral thing, but let's not be naive. They're eating their competitors' lunch. Many of the vendors at GitHub Universe had feature-sets that had clear overlap with GitHub's own ambitions, particularly in the security space. GitHub can and will put them out of business when the opportunity strikes. These ambitions are clear. C'est la vie. What's less clear is how developer-friendly the ecosystem will remain when everything is locked into GitHub's world,. And it's even less clear how they will ratchet up pricing (or ratchet down interoperability or industry standards) as more gets sucked in. It is an enterprise B2B company and a part of Microsoft, for better and for worse.
- reactordev 3y ago
  This isn’t a future I want to support. GitLab, Gitea, and others are going to need some love.
- Aerbil313 3y ago
  As far as I can see, the only kind of leverage left that we have against big corporations exploiting non-tech folks is creating OS software and giving it away for free. This is what they can’t compete with.
- diarrhea 3y ago
  The effect is extremely strong. One factor is that almost everything works identically between work and personal environments. Same git, same CI, same settings, same dependabot, same PRs, same everything. My personal open source projects get it for free, at work the employer pays. In most other cases of technology choices, work and personal environments can differ a lot (languages, operating system, development machine, database systems, …). That makes choices less sticky.
alexfromapex 3y ago
This is definitely for marketing purposes only not good will but at least it’s positive
no_wizard 3y ago
I think the biggest thing about GitHub being widely popular with OSS is that public repositories get free CI/CD. I do not know of any other platform that gives you completely free CI/CD, there is either a usual limit or its a paid feature.
Aerbil313 3y ago
See also the recent events: ChatGPT code interpreter only generating Python code and Microsoft embedding Python into Excel. Microsoft, for whatever reason, is betting on Python.

ploum 3y ago

Indeed. The fact that nobody seems concerned about Github/Microsoft monopoly is concerning to say the least. https://ploum.net/2023-02-22-leaving-github.html https://ploum.net/2023-02-22-leaving-github.html

dcgudeman 3y ago
Really confused why people don't seem to use the term "monopoly" correctly. Monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service. Github does not have in any sense exclusive possession or control of hosted version control. It is a popular choice, that's it.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  I agree. GitHub is the biggest player, but it's a pretty layer on top of an inherently distributed system. If I get tired of Microsoft's shenanigans, I can pack up move to a competitor with only the normal amount of friction (like moving bug reports over, etc.). I use Gitea for my personal projects and it handles 95% of the code-hosting bits just as well.
  - mjw1007 3y ago
    I'm not so relaxed about how easy it will be to move to a new issue tracker. When you're moving from a self-hosted system to a proprietary system, you can do the work yourself to make sure there are redirects from the old URLs to the new ones. That option isn't likely to be available when you're moving the other way. I observe that github is happy for you to "bring your own domain" for github pages, but AIUI issue and PR URLs are always under github.com .
    - kstrauser 3y ago
      Maintaining links is going to be a pain in the neck, sure. I don't mean to make light of it. However, that's kind of inherent with going from one service to another, and not something GitHub's doing to make it artificially harder.
mjw1007 3y ago
I agree. I'm not, at this stage, tremendously worried about Microsoft finding ways to use its control of Github to get its own way in some kind of conflict. I am worried about what happens if, or when, Github's owners decide it's time to stop caring about having a good reputation and instead squeeze it for as much profit as possible (what we seem to be calling "enshittification" these days). Pointing git remotes somewhere different shouldn't be a huge pain, but all those issue trackers are a different matter.

ryanianian 3y ago

> we already give Github far too much influence over the free software Yup. I was at GitHub Universe last week. It's very clear GitHub (Microsoft) is trying to become like AWS but for the SDLC instead of for runtime. Soon we'll all be using GitHub full-time to do all our coding in the browser with integrated runtime envs and CI and AI along for the ride. You get a taste with some fancy OSS demo projects which they do legitimately support. Then you want to integrate with those OSS libraries, so you have to dip your toes into GitHub's ecosystem. And if you want updates and security and to not have public repos ... then time to pony up. GitHub does support OSS in real ways, but it's pretty obviously a loss-leading marketing / freemium strategy. It's not surprising they give themslves a pat on the back - it's marketing after all. This is not a bad or even amoral thing, but let's not be naive. They're eating their competitors' lunch. Many of the vendors at GitHub Universe had feature-sets that had clear overlap with GitHub's own ambitions, particularly in the security space. GitHub can and will put them out of business when the opportunity strikes. These ambitions are clear. C'est la vie. What's less clear is how developer-friendly the ecosystem will remain when everything is locked into GitHub's world,. And it's even less clear how they will ratchet up pricing (or ratchet down interoperability or industry standards) as more gets sucked in. It is an enterprise B2B company and a part of Microsoft, for better and for worse.

reactordev 3y ago
This isn’t a future I want to support. GitLab, Gitea, and others are going to need some love.
Aerbil313 3y ago
As far as I can see, the only kind of leverage left that we have against big corporations exploiting non-tech folks is creating OS software and giving it away for free. This is what they can’t compete with.
diarrhea 3y ago
The effect is extremely strong. One factor is that almost everything works identically between work and personal environments. Same git, same CI, same settings, same dependabot, same PRs, same everything. My personal open source projects get it for free, at work the employer pays. In most other cases of technology choices, work and personal environments can differ a lot (languages, operating system, development machine, database systems, …). That makes choices less sticky.

alexfromapex 3y ago

This is definitely for marketing purposes only not good will but at least it’s positive

no_wizard 3y ago

I think the biggest thing about GitHub being widely popular with OSS is that public repositories get free CI/CD. I do not know of any other platform that gives you completely free CI/CD, there is either a usual limit or its a paid feature.

Aerbil313 3y ago

See also the recent events: ChatGPT code interpreter only generating Python code and Microsoft embedding Python into Excel. Microsoft, for whatever reason, is betting on Python.