13 ms·
Nginx has moved to GitHub
- xeromal 2y agoI wonder how the interim process is handled? They're accepting mailing list updates until the end of the year. Does someone take the mailing list updates and manually PR them into Github? I've never actually used a mailing list so I'm curious how it works.
- hinkley 2y agoRemember Linus created git to help deal with an ever escalating inbox full of patches.
- layer8 2y agoYou have your history wrong here.
- hinkley 2y agoNo I don’t. You’re confusing motivation with requirements. I’m talking about requirements. But of advice. Outside of TV programming, when an American is talking about why a tool was created, they almost always mean its purpose, not its origin story. That inspiration story on TV is aimed at inventors. The people who use the tools don’t care, and it’s an anecdote for the rest of us. I suspect that has something to do with that illusion we maintained of American Ingenuity. I don’t need the back story, what’s it for?
- jraph 2y ago> You’re confusing motivation with requirements. I’m talking about requirements. Or, they just disagree with your statement. It would have been better they say why though.
- ruthmarx 2y ago> But of advice. Outside of TV programming, when an American is talking about why a tool was created, they almost always mean its purpose, not its origin story. It's so bizarre you're giving advice here based on such strong assumptions. There was absolutely no need to bring nationality into this discussion at all.
- aryonoco 2y agocough BitKeeper cough
- hinkley 2y ago[flagged]
- lillecarl 2y agohttps://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-A-Short-History-of-Git https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-A-Short-Histo... A lot
- hinkley 2y agoNo, that’s why git was started. I know why git was started. What does it have to do with how git was designed?
- jraph 2y agoThat's why and how. > This prompted the Linux development community (and in particular Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux) to develop their own tool based on some of the lessons they learned while using BitKeeper. (Emphasis mine). Git was designed with the experience of using BitKeeper in mind.
- juped 2y agoI'm sorry people are being dismissively snide and downvotive about this reasonable characterization of things (see: https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=111288700902396 https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=111288700902396) because they think knowing the factoid that linux used bitkeeper is some kind of "epic own".
- hinkley 2y ago[flagged]
- layer8 2y agoProbably the same as with Mercurial before. Mailing lists are just regular emails that are automatically remailed to multiple recipients.
- juped 2y agoNo, git is an email driven program, not a terrible-webapp driven program. You pipe the email into git am (if it's from mercurial insert hg-patch-to-git-patch into the pipeline, which iirc just rewrites date formats mainly?)
- aryonoco 2y agoAround 15 or so years ago, when a lot of projects were moving from cvs/mailing lists to git, there were a plethora of perl scripts and other tools which automatically took the code and sent the commit to git, usually taking a "rules" file as input which stipulated how to match various email headers with git tags etc. No idea how many of them are still around or used, but there should be some
- aseipp 2y agoWith a mailing list you download a patch and apply it with "git am", then push it to the repository -- as you are presumably the maintainer who has permission to do that, and assuming the patch is good. You basically just do code review through email and reading the patches with some git functions. It completely sucks in my opinion, but some people like it, or it's how they do things in those parts, etc. When in Rome... Having done a similar rodeo in the past -- migrating a project to an actual code review tool that enforces some more rigid structure, over plain patch files -- the interim process will probably be something like: - Previously, some key people were allowed to commit to trunk directly. - They would read emails/patches, do code review, apply, and push them to trunk. - For now, you can keep emailing people your patches like you did before. Nothing will change. - But at a certain point, you'll have to use this new Other Method. - So, you should probably get familiar with Other Method early, by using it in the meantime, so you can be ready. - At some point, no more patch files will be accepted and you will have to use Other Method. - In the meantime, the maintainers will do double-duty and handle both venues. Most projects are small enough where the double-duty isn't so bad. Most people will switch quick enough and you probably aren't dealing with 1,000 patches. It sucks but the payoff is considered worth it. Eventually once this is completed you can do things like stop pushing directly to trunk and handling all patches to main through the Other Method. But you don't have to do that. It does sound like they'll stop accepting email patches, though.
- jsheard 2y agoWhat's the state of nginx nowadays? Last I heard the original core team had fractured and formed two different forks while F5 continued to develop OG nginx, so there's three nginxes being developed in parallel now. Have the forks gained any traction?
- 0x1ch 2y agoThe state of nginx is fine, similar to pfsense. Both made a "Plus" enterprise support offering, open source clones were forked, the originals remain dominant for enterprise and free users anyways. Not to detract from the great projects that are being worked on, like freenginx and opnsense.
- nicholasjarnold 2y ago> the originals remain dominant for enterprise and free users anyways. I'm a former pfSense user that reluctantly moved to OPNsense a handful of years ago after a lot of bad press around Netgate started circulating widely causing me to believe that support for the community offering might wane over time. I was under the impression that many people had moved off of pfSense for home use. I'm surprised by your assertion that it "remains dominant" for free users, and I wonder how you might know this? OPNsense has been rock solid for me, btw. I was reluctant to switch only because of the time sink and perceived risk. Nobody wants to spend a weekend debugging VLAN tagging on their WAN port or some such. Luckily for me, there were no such issues when switching over.
- SpecialistK 2y agopfSense maintains some momentum due to name recognition, but anyone who digs a little deeper will see that they're clowns and go with OPN instead.
- luckman212 2y agoCan you please cite some recent examples of this clownlike behavior?
- azzentys 2y agoRecently, I was browsing an open source project I use a lot. "Sign in to search code on GitHub" was kinda discouraging to see. Sure, I can clone it and run grep/ripgrep - but sometimes I like the ability to search the code on the browser. Is it only GitHub where this is a restriction or GitLab is similar?
- eblume 2y agoIt's worth mentioning here I think that github's code search is really quite good. I'm not trying to say that github can do no harm or that github "owning" OSS code hosting is a good thing, but the github search bar is a utility that IMO is worth the price of admission. I think that sourcegraph maintains a similar quality OSS code search that can be searched for free but I have not personally used it.
- nicce 2y agoInteresting blog about how it works: https://github.blog/engineering/the-technology-behind-githubs-new-code-search/ https://github.blog/engineering/the-technology-behind-github...
- AlotOfReading 2y agoThe problem is that GH makes it the login process as painful as possible. Login tokens expire frequently, necessitating new logins. Logins require 2fa every time, which makes them extremely flow-breaking. Post-login you're not returned to the file you were on, so now you need to navigate back to search. Logins are per domain and per device, so I end up dealing with this 4x per day if I'm using GitHub heavily. It's unnecessary.
- aseipp 2y agoTo me, ordinary login is one of the things they've genuinely improved over time I feel? I absolutely never deal with logins more than once a day per machine? With stuff like Passkey support now, I basically click two buttons in 1Pass and I'm logged in instantly on ~everywhere. I also feel like I never have my tokens expire. I'm probably not doing the same stuff as you. It's sudo/elevated mode that really gets you I think, if you have no fast flow. Admittedly I don't add keys or anything like that very often.
- randomman1131 2y agowow! about time... weren't they using mercurial for the longest time too?
- gpvos 2y agoThey could have moved to Sourcehut instead and kept using Mercurial.
- lagniappe 2y agoI don't see that going well.
- kstrauser 2y agoI like Sourcehut and I've very glad it exists. I almost personally detest its email-driven workflows. I don't claim that they're bad. Rather, I personally don't like that way of working at all. I'd far rather use GitLab or some random dev's Gitea/Forgejo server.
- dewey 2y agoI think the point is to go where the community is, not further away from it.
- pachico 2y agoHelp me understand: they just migrated and already have 21k stars?
- ak217 2y agoIt was previously a read-only mirror.
- quectophoton 2y agoYup, here I was wondering why I already had it starred if this move only happened today, but then reached the same conclusion that it was probably a mirror repository before.
- oblvious-earth 2y agoNo, it looks like it's been available on GitHub for a while, but development wasn't done there: https://star-history.com/#nginx/nginx&Date https://star-history.com/#nginx/nginx&Date
- LtWorf 2y agoStars on github are completely meaningless, since there are services online you can hire to increase stars. In my project a considerable amount of stars come from blank accounts, that like also non-paying projects to avoid detection. I moved to codeberg now for my non work projects.
- juped 2y agoSad day for everyone, but it was probably inevitable with the original devs gone and the project managed by suit-types. No one gets fired for buying Microsoft and all that.
- gamepsys 2y agoI think it's disappointing that the default toolchain for collaborating on free and open source software includes GitHub which is very much not free and open source, and is backed by Microsoft which has a mixed history in regards to it's relationship with open source software.
- lionkor 2y agoI use it because its good right now. I used Windows until it turned bad (8) and Linux was easier. If GitHub becomes shit I'm moving my projects off of there and that's that.
- gamepsys 2y agoHopefully your projects aren't too ingrained in the github ecosystem for migrating to be an issue. It's a bug tracker, a feature request tracker, a patch tracker ,a wiki, a release repository, plus an onramp to all sorts of azure functionality with gh actions.
- lionkor 2y agoLast time I checked Gitea can import PRs and issues!
- jacooper 2y agoI think it would've been a better choice to move to something they host like gitea or gitlab. nonetheless it's a step in the right direction, nobody should use mail+git in this day and age.
- patmorgan23 2y agocough" Linux Kernel cough*
- jacooper 2y agoJust because Linux is still using it doesn't mean it's any good.
- Dr4kn 2y agoOr it is good in that case, but that is true for very few projects.
- bsder 2y agoAyup. Which is why it is heartbreaking to see Nginx move from Mercurial which is good to Git which sucks. Thankfully, jujutsu exists so I can use a good version control system and still interoperate with the misguided who don't realize just how bad Git sucks.
- gchamonlive 2y agoAlso thought this was a lost opportunity to favor gitlab. It's arguably a better choice overall.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- insane_dreamer 2y agodoes anyone use mercurial anymore?
- incognito124 2y agoBig corpos like Google and Meta (sort of, at least)
- quectophoton 2y agoProsody, at least: https://hg.prosody.im/ https://hg.prosody.im/
- MattJ100 2y agoAnd we're very happy with the choice :) Mercurial has many neat features, and I much prefer working with it. I don't think Git is all bad, but I do feel sad that it has basically become an expectation that you use it, to the exclusion of all other options.
- RadiozRadioz 2y agoPidgin https://keep.imfreedom.org/pidgin/pidgin/ https://keep.imfreedom.org/pidgin/pidgin/
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- badgersnake 2y agoCentralise all the things. There is too much stuff of GitHub. From a resiliency point of view and from a monopoly point of view this is bad.
- minkles 2y agoAh no it's great. I'm waiting until they fuck something major up and will start an off-boarding consultancy.
- doublerabbit 2y agoNo different to SourceForge of the 90's apart from it had a kind of a community feel.
- beachy 2y agoSource control is not like other systems. It's (largely) a backup of stuff that is stored elsewhere. Resilience/ monopoly concerns are much less.
- game_the0ry 2y ago^^ This. Git is a beautiful thing. Thanks again, Linus.
- badgersnake 2y agoGitHub is pretty obviously more than just a git repo on a server.
- eesmith 2y agoYou must surely know that people use Microsoft GitHub for far more than source control, right?, with issue tracking, email notification, CI, and GitHub Actions. I recently tried to get a small FOSS project to switch to Codeburg. The answer was "no" because the free CI for them let them catch some MacOS on Apple Silicon bugs (the devs don't have that hardware locally), and because they are already used to GitHub, making it easier to onboard people and review PRs.
- 2y ago
- syngrog66 2y agoI loved the tech design of Nginx when it came out. However eventually its Russian provenance became too risky for my use cases. Plus I began a moral boycott of all things Russian... where I can easily enough anyway. Plenty of other choices now for web servers compared to late 90s or early 2000s.
- ruthmarx 2y agoWhat do you use instead?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- oshams 2y ago[flagged]
- djha-skin 2y ago> Most of all, we can't wait to see all of your contributions, discussions and feedback, as we move into this next chapter for NGINX. The real economic reason to open source part of your product.
- noobermin 2y agoIs the dream of hg dead? It feels like everyone has "solved" the git-is-complicated problem by using essentially gui webtools to deal with it, but the point of the hg people was to make a tool that is simpler on the surface than git.