3 ms·

If you consider $7 (or $12) a month a lot of money for software then you're probably not in the target audience for any (SaaS) software product. A lot of people

by jd 14y ago

If you consider $7 (or $12) a month a lot of money for software then you're probably not in the target audience for any (SaaS) software product. A lot of people are willing to pay some money for a SaaS product even when there are free alternatives. I can't think of any piece of software I use regularly that doesn't cross the "worth at least $7 bucks" boundary.

LordIllidan 14y ago
But it's not just $7. We are a small consulting company, with a lot of git repositories. Our total costs would be more in the range of $50 a month. That's what I am getting at. $7 a month is not all that expensive, you're right - but I am only getting 5 private repositories for that $7 a month. It just doesn't make sense to use github for private work when you have a lot of repositories.
- wilmoore 14y ago
  If you have each client take on the $ burden, then you don't have this problem. You've may have convinced yourself that by absorbing the cost, you are doing your client a great service. In fact, you are putting more burden on yourself for little value. It takes 15 minutes to walk the client through how to pay for and manage a github organization. I do it with all of my clients. It is an opportunity to teach/coach and give them a sense of ownership which is how it should be.
  - LordIllidan 14y ago
    You make a good point in that this could be absorbed as an implicit cost of a client project - but tell me again, why would we do this, when we can simply use BitBucket and create as many repositories as we like, without any problems whatsoever? Our only limit is then the amount of people we hire, which is far more reasonable in my eyes. If we were working on a small number of projects, then it would absolutely not be a problem to work with Github - it's when you have a lot of tiny projects that it becomes prohibitively expensive to work with. Fair enough, that's how Github wants to price their service - I guess its catered more to actual startups (who have a few large core projects) rather than businesses like ours.

by jd 14y ago

LordIllidan 14y ago

But it's not just $7. We are a small consulting company, with a lot of git repositories. Our total costs would be more in the range of $50 a month. That's what I am getting at. $7 a month is not all that expensive, you're right - but I am only getting 5 private repositories for that $7 a month. It just doesn't make sense to use github for private work when you have a lot of repositories.

wilmoore 14y ago
If you have each client take on the $ burden, then you don't have this problem. You've may have convinced yourself that by absorbing the cost, you are doing your client a great service. In fact, you are putting more burden on yourself for little value. It takes 15 minutes to walk the client through how to pay for and manage a github organization. I do it with all of my clients. It is an opportunity to teach/coach and give them a sense of ownership which is how it should be.
- LordIllidan 14y ago
  You make a good point in that this could be absorbed as an implicit cost of a client project - but tell me again, why would we do this, when we can simply use BitBucket and create as many repositories as we like, without any problems whatsoever? Our only limit is then the amount of people we hire, which is far more reasonable in my eyes. If we were working on a small number of projects, then it would absolutely not be a problem to work with Github - it's when you have a lot of tiny projects that it becomes prohibitively expensive to work with. Fair enough, that's how Github wants to price their service - I guess its catered more to actual startups (who have a few large core projects) rather than businesses like ours.