4 ms·

Overall LFS feels a very hacky tacked on solution with warts. Git LFS is horrible if you mistakenly add some file(s) to LFS. Restoring to LFS-less state is su

by sireat 3y ago

Overall LFS feels a very hacky tacked on solution with warts. Git LFS is horrible if you mistakenly add some file(s) to LFS. Restoring to LFS-less state is supposed to be easy but it is always very painful. There should be a way to tell repo - I do not want any LFS at all. In practice this is painful, and it is easier to start a new repo.... Also for some reason Github/Microsoft decided to "monetize" LFS. The freebie limits are 1GB for hosting AND transfer! Then the charges get very expensive. I am not sure why Github LFS is priced like some AWS S3 plan not OneDrive plan.

vtbassmatt 3y ago
GitHub charges for LFS and has since they initially introduced it, way before Microsoft was involved. Also, the pricing model is changing and will include a minimum of 10GiB for free (250GiB for Team/Enterprise customers). It’s cost-recovery and abuse-prevention, though, not some nefarious scheme. And funny you mention AWS S3... what costs might GitHub be recovering? ;) Microsoft’s homegrown LFS implementation (in Azure DevOps) does not and has never charged for LFS. It’s nice to have friends with a cloud blob storage service! Source: I was the product manager for Azure Repos’s LFS server and am currently the product manager for all things Git at GitHub.