5 ms·
Redesigning GitHub
- kaolinite 14y agoI'm unsure why Github needs to be simplified and I certainly don't want to see it simplified at the expense of functionality, as is shown in this article. I can't stand this constant drive to simplify everything, which is more and more plaguing software.
- kolektiv 14y agoSimple does not have to mean featureless. Essentially equating lack of ease with a UI as stupidity is somewhat rude, but worse it's short sighted. Many people have spoken recently about the Github UI - it's much better than what came before in that world, but it can be better, as I'm sure they'd admit. Your "constant drive to simplify" is better understood as a constant drive to improve. Local maxima are dangerously beguiling, we should always question.
- kaolinite 14y ago"Simple does not have to mean featureless" Very, very true. Good design can be simple and powerful. However, sadly - it often does mean featureless and this link is a perfect example. Edit: Why the downvotes? Both my posts were just downvoted. If you don't agree, fair enough - but please tell me why rather than just downvoting and running.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jkochis 14y agoI'm gonna guess that you're getting down voted because your first post is a poorly thought out attack, and it seems like you didn't read the article.
- kaolinite 14y ago@jkochris, Fair enough. My first post was quick to attack (and I have now edited this to show my points in a calmer manner) however I'm unsure why my second post was downvoted as it was - as far as I'm concerned - a perfectly legitimate response. As for not reading the article, I can assure you that I did. I am simply sick of quality software being ruined. I think the perfect example of this is the Gnome desktop, which is being trashed by designers who are removing key features and functionality - all in the name of simplifying and making things look "elegant" and "beautiful". There are many more cases of this, both commercially (Windows 8 may be the latest example, soon enough) and in the open-source world.
- rrreese 14y agoThe current github is overflowing with visual noise. You don't need to be some sort of moron to desire a less cluttered interface. The recent post http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3814508 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3814508 has many readers commenting on their preference for a bit less clutter.
- jondot 14y agoTo provide healthy criticism, I think the redesign suggested ignores one thing - the social experience. In the redesign, the significance of project is diminished and the page feels more like a directory listing. This is IMHO what bitbucket and the rest are doing wrong; and what Github does right. I understand the need for simplification - that's great, just perhaps take into account the fact that for people working on a repository - it is not just a listing of files but an experience of working on a project. I feel that Github takes care to blur the boundary between the two.
- cbetta 14y agoI've been trying to explain to people lately how to use Github and every time I tell them to go to "Commits" they get totally lost. Everything is the same grey bland, there are a total of about 7 navigation bars, and a lot of clutter. The fact that they get lost is a clear sign that something is very wrong. This design is obviously a recognition of the problems and a suggestion of what could be. It's not 100% right but it illustrates the possibilities. I'm very confident that the guys at GH know this though and I'm looking forward to what they come up with.
- bjtitus 14y agoRemoving the repository URL is a terrible thing. That is a key piece of information that anyone trying to get started with a project needs to know. Maybe it could be hidden after you've pulled but it needs to be there in the beginning, at least.