4 ms·
Was GitHub really critical at time of purchase? Or has Microsoft turned it into critical infrastructure?
by andrewinardeer 1y ago
Was GitHub really critical at time of purchase? Or has Microsoft turned it into critical infrastructure?
- rs186 1y agoIf you travel back to 2018 and ask random software engineers "are git and github developed and owned by the same company", a fair number of them would say yes, just like today.
- oytis 1y agoIt was the leading git storage at the time of acquisition, for many people synonymous with git itself
- daemin 1y agoEven though Git is decentralised, people like having a simple client-server model for version control. So with Github being the most funded free Git hosting service it grew to being the biggest. They also built out the extra services on top of git hosting, the issue tracker, CI/CD, discussion board, integrated wiki, github-pages, etc. I would say all of those things were present before the acquisition, enough that Microsoft itself started to use the site for its own open source code hosting.
- diggan 1y ago> Was GitHub really critical at time of purchase? Do you think they would have bought it otherwise? Same for NPM, they got bought for huge sums of money because they were "critical" already.
- andrewinardeer 1y agoI am of the opinion that it wasn't critical infra, but it was at least unique infra. Similar to LinkedIn, which MS acquired. It wasn't that LI was critical it was because it was unique. And since the acquisition, they have built it out to be critical. Similar to what META did with Instagram. Instagram wasn't critical when META purchased it, but now it is the cornerstone of any business's online presence as it has been built out.