4 ms·
...how about some privacy controls? I'd really prefer not to advertise which users and projects I'm following or starring. Now I have Facebook trying to own and
by Harkins 14y ago
...how about some privacy controls? I'd really prefer not to advertise which users and projects I'm following or starring. Now I have Facebook trying to own and broadcast my personal life and GitHub trying to own and broadcast my professional one. Ugh.
- solox3 14y agoCan you give an example where you would star something you find embarrassing?
- benologist 14y agoAn api wrapper for RedTube. https://github.com/dcrec1/redtube https://github.com/dcrec1/redtube
- Harkins 14y agoI don't need to. What I choose to pay attention to should be private by default. And it's not about personal embarrassment, it's also about security. If I star code I rely on to watch for updates, I'd be publicly advertising the attack surface for my app. That really sucks.
- graywh 14y agoHow are you getting updates for projects you've starred?
- endeavor 14y agoI certainly understanding wanting to have control over what you want private. But stars and forks are the main things I use to evaluate a project I'm unfamiliar with. If a project has 1000 stars and 100 forks I know it's pretty solid. If those metrics were disabled by default Github loses a lot of value, since the majority of users would stick with the defaults.
- ocharles 14y agoThe counter doesn't have to be private, but being able to view exactly what one person has starred should have a privacy control. We do this at MusicBrainz with 'subscriptions' (to be notified when something changes). We give a number of subscribers, and those with public subscriptions are explicitly listed: http://musicbrainz.org/artist/10adbe5e-a2c0-4bf3-8249-2b4cbf6e6ca8/subscribers http://musicbrainz.org/artist/10adbe5e-a2c0-4bf3-8249-2b4cbf...