4 ms·

Why GitHub? Of course it's the most popular (due to goodwill before it was acquired, and then inertia), but there are also other options that might be a better

by neilv 2y ago

Why GitHub? Of course it's the most popular (due to goodwill before it was acquired, and then inertia), but there are also other options that might be a better match for Mozilla's open mission.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
chris_wot 2y ago
GitHub is pretty open, I'm not sure what the problem is.
- soperj 2y ago
  I like it as a code repo, but issues suck, not being able to duplicate an issue is incredibly annoying. You'd think programmers would make that piece easy, but instead you get a shit ton of button pushing.
  - astrange 2y ago
    Why do you specifically want to duplicate an issue? I feel like I'd avoid implementing this because I don't want someone to do it to me. (Obviously there's good reasons like creating subtasks.)
  - thiht 2y ago
    What's the use case for duplicating an issue? Maybe you want issue templates instead?
    - soperj 2y ago
      to have an issue that is exactly like one you've already created, with all the corresponding labels, milestones and project attributes. If you could create a issue template with all of those then that would be fine, but the issue templates are trash too.
- weaksauce 2y ago
  and it's not like there is much of a problem moving from github to xyz later if they feel like they need to. this just makes their burden of infrastructure less and reduce friction with all the contributors. of course bugzilla is still the main way to file bugs/submit patches. the overhead on cinnabar was pretty tangible and real for doing any kind of meaningful work on the codebase with git.
- jonhohle 2y ago
  Historically Mozilla was an enemy of Microsoft, as in Microsoft actively worked to put Netscape out of business and was convicted as an illegal monopoly based on behavior directed at them. There may or may not still be some people involved with the project that harbor resentment or distrust to Microsoft and have little interest in creating an account on one of their services.
  - neilv 2y ago
    Not only distrust, but Mozilla would be endorsing GitHub.
    - chris_wot 2y ago
      Microsoft is a very different beast today than what it was decades ago.
      - wakawaka28 2y ago
        Not really... Microsoft still wants to rule the world. The evidence is abundant, and their open source contributions don't change the situation all that much.
whalesalad 2y ago
Why not? It’s still the best place to host a code repo.
- NilMostChill 2y ago
  for you perhaps, sure. "Best" is all kinds of subjective though.
Terretta 2y ago
It's not inertia, it's gravity. There is a pull to be the place things are. You can find things, and your thing can be found.
- bawolff 2y ago
  To be honest, i never really understood this mentality for github. Code contribution isn't really the sort of thing people just randomly start doing because they are already on github. Github is not a social network (no matter how hard they might try to push social features)
  - djbusby 2y ago
    What you say is true and IME the driving feature of GH is discoverability. Project there gets Stars (cause they have an account already, cause inertia). They show up for lots of Google search, etc.
    - MBCook 2y ago
      Right. It’s basically a version of Metcalfe's law isn’t it? “[it] states that the financial value or influence of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system.” (Wikipedia)
  - floating-io 2y ago
    I disagree. My observation: instead of gaming likes, people are gaming contribution metrics. It's a subtle sort of "social credit score" type thing these days. It may not be Facebook, but the social aspects and impacts are nevertheless strong.
    - wasabinator 2y ago
      Agree with this. My coworkers often use their personal accounts purely for those sweet sweet contribution dots.
    - 2y ago
lolinder 2y ago
Unfortunately the software forge landscape leaves a lot to be desired right now. GitLab has leaned completely into becoming an enterprise DevSecOps platform at the expense of open source. Their 2015 homepage [0] emphasized its own open source nature and their free offerings. Their current homepage [1] doesn't mention open source at all and only includes the word "free" in the phrase "free trial". The banner at the top of the page currently reads "GitLab 17 & the future of AI-driven development". They've come a long way from being the underdog champion of open source. Gitea is doing better for now, but the trademark was transferred to a for-profit (Gitea Ltd) and the main gitea.com domain is now being administered by a different for-profit (CommitGo, Inc), with very little transparency about what either of those for-profits are doing and how they'll use their ownership of these key resources. In light of recent license changes by major for-profit open-source companies and the recent behavior of GitLab, I'm not thrilled about Gitea's IP transfer to multiple opaque for-profit companies. Codeberg.org's fork of Gitea (Forgejo) has a governance structure that is more appealing in that it is not profit-oriented, but I'm nervous about overmoderation in the Forgejo community [2]. Constructive opposition to the election of moderators (based on their past abuse of authority) got edited away as "ad hominem attacks" and has since been completely deleted from the election thread. They're a nonprofit, but after watching the episode linked below unfold and then get swept away entirely I don't trust their governance process at all. There are other, smaller options that have fewer problems, but none with anything like the features that GitHub offers. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20150316170559/https://about.gitlab.com/ http://web.archive.org/web/20150316170559/https://about.gitl... [1] https://about.gitlab.com/ https://about.gitlab.com/ [2] See this HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39397269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39397269. The critical comments that had been edited at the time of that HN thread have now been eliminated entirely from the linked issue and the only Internet Archive hit that's left for that page is from after the comments were completely deleted. That's not a good look.
- neilv 2y ago
  Thanks for the info! Just a random thought, but would some kind of partnership or merger between Mozilla and Codeberg... be good for both, and for the Internet?

by neilv 2y ago

Why GitHub? Of course it's the most popular (due to goodwill before it was acquired, and then inertia), but there are also other options that might be a better match for Mozilla's open mission.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

chris_wot 2y ago

GitHub is pretty open, I'm not sure what the problem is.

soperj 2y ago
I like it as a code repo, but issues suck, not being able to duplicate an issue is incredibly annoying. You'd think programmers would make that piece easy, but instead you get a shit ton of button pushing.
- astrange 2y ago
  Why do you specifically want to duplicate an issue? I feel like I'd avoid implementing this because I don't want someone to do it to me. (Obviously there's good reasons like creating subtasks.)
- thiht 2y ago
  What's the use case for duplicating an issue? Maybe you want issue templates instead?
  - soperj 2y ago
    to have an issue that is exactly like one you've already created, with all the corresponding labels, milestones and project attributes. If you could create a issue template with all of those then that would be fine, but the issue templates are trash too.
weaksauce 2y ago
and it's not like there is much of a problem moving from github to xyz later if they feel like they need to. this just makes their burden of infrastructure less and reduce friction with all the contributors. of course bugzilla is still the main way to file bugs/submit patches. the overhead on cinnabar was pretty tangible and real for doing any kind of meaningful work on the codebase with git.
jonhohle 2y ago
Historically Mozilla was an enemy of Microsoft, as in Microsoft actively worked to put Netscape out of business and was convicted as an illegal monopoly based on behavior directed at them. There may or may not still be some people involved with the project that harbor resentment or distrust to Microsoft and have little interest in creating an account on one of their services.
- neilv 2y ago
  Not only distrust, but Mozilla would be endorsing GitHub.
  - chris_wot 2y ago
    Microsoft is a very different beast today than what it was decades ago.
    - wakawaka28 2y ago
      Not really... Microsoft still wants to rule the world. The evidence is abundant, and their open source contributions don't change the situation all that much.

whalesalad 2y ago

Why not? It’s still the best place to host a code repo.

NilMostChill 2y ago
for you perhaps, sure. "Best" is all kinds of subjective though.

Terretta 2y ago

It's not inertia, it's gravity. There is a pull to be the place things are. You can find things, and your thing can be found.

bawolff 2y ago
To be honest, i never really understood this mentality for github. Code contribution isn't really the sort of thing people just randomly start doing because they are already on github. Github is not a social network (no matter how hard they might try to push social features)
- djbusby 2y ago
  What you say is true and IME the driving feature of GH is discoverability. Project there gets Stars (cause they have an account already, cause inertia). They show up for lots of Google search, etc.
  - MBCook 2y ago
    Right. It’s basically a version of Metcalfe's law isn’t it? “[it] states that the financial value or influence of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system.” (Wikipedia)
- floating-io 2y ago
  I disagree. My observation: instead of gaming likes, people are gaming contribution metrics. It's a subtle sort of "social credit score" type thing these days. It may not be Facebook, but the social aspects and impacts are nevertheless strong.
  - wasabinator 2y ago
    Agree with this. My coworkers often use their personal accounts purely for those sweet sweet contribution dots.
  - 2y ago

lolinder 2y ago

Unfortunately the software forge landscape leaves a lot to be desired right now. GitLab has leaned completely into becoming an enterprise DevSecOps platform at the expense of open source. Their 2015 homepage [0] emphasized its own open source nature and their free offerings. Their current homepage [1] doesn't mention open source at all and only includes the word "free" in the phrase "free trial". The banner at the top of the page currently reads "GitLab 17 & the future of AI-driven development". They've come a long way from being the underdog champion of open source. Gitea is doing better for now, but the trademark was transferred to a for-profit (Gitea Ltd) and the main gitea.com domain is now being administered by a different for-profit (CommitGo, Inc), with very little transparency about what either of those for-profits are doing and how they'll use their ownership of these key resources. In light of recent license changes by major for-profit open-source companies and the recent behavior of GitLab, I'm not thrilled about Gitea's IP transfer to multiple opaque for-profit companies. Codeberg.org's fork of Gitea (Forgejo) has a governance structure that is more appealing in that it is not profit-oriented, but I'm nervous about overmoderation in the Forgejo community [2]. Constructive opposition to the election of moderators (based on their past abuse of authority) got edited away as "ad hominem attacks" and has since been completely deleted from the election thread. They're a nonprofit, but after watching the episode linked below unfold and then get swept away entirely I don't trust their governance process at all. There are other, smaller options that have fewer problems, but none with anything like the features that GitHub offers. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20150316170559/https://about.gitlab.com/ http://web.archive.org/web/20150316170559/https://about.gitl... [1] https://about.gitlab.com/ https://about.gitlab.com/ [2] See this HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39397269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39397269. The critical comments that had been edited at the time of that HN thread have now been eliminated entirely from the linked issue and the only Internet Archive hit that's left for that page is from after the comments were completely deleted. That's not a good look.

neilv 2y ago
Thanks for the info! Just a random thought, but would some kind of partnership or merger between Mozilla and Codeberg... be good for both, and for the Internet?