3 ms·
Source control is not like other systems. It's (largely) a backup of stuff that is stored elsewhere. Resilience/ monopoly concerns are much less.
by beachy 2y ago
Source 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.
- TillE 2y agoSo what's the problem? GitHub gives you a bunch of free stuff that would be pretty annoying/expensive to self host. Seems like a good deal. If they remove some of that stuff, that would be worth complaining about. Until then, seems smart to take advantage of what GitHub is offering. Their CI isn't even super proprietary, you can basically just write bash scripts.
- eesmith 2y agoI pointed out that any "Resilience/ monopoly concerns" must consider more than source hosting. The phrase "pretty annoying/expensive to self host" highlights the source of those concerns. How could one "just write bash scripts" to support macOS if you don't have Apple hardware, as in my example?
- badgersnake 2y ago> If they remove some of that stuff, that would be worth complaining about. By then it’s too late, because there’s no alternative.
- fieldcny 2y agoQuite the opposite, depending on how it’s used it is THE authoritative system for the code, which gets exponentially more valuable with more contributors