4 ms·

Yes, but GitHub is more than just git. The most important aspect of the platform that everybody seems to forget is the social component and how easy it made to

Yes, but GitHub is more than just git. The most important aspect of the platform that everybody seems to forget is the social component and how easy it made to create a persistent, off-site repository and collaborate across repos.

MrFurious 5mo ago
The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS.
- rapnie 5mo ago
  People forget what FOSS is, and you get a world of unclear expectations. FOSS is code + a copyright license. How the code is created is an entirely different matter, and where FOSS projects often fall short. As FOSS projects come Forgejo is well-organized around a community governance model.
  - brunoborges 5mo ago
    Indeed, the fact that maintainers didn't have until only recently the control for disabling Pull Requests tab in a GitHub repo, is what drove a lot of issues in FOSS collaboration over the past decade. FOSS and open source licenses never ever granted entitlement for contributors to have their proposals reviewed/merged by maintainers. Neither it ever offered entitlement for users to ask for free support. FOSS is about giving people access to source code so they can do with it whatever they want, and maintainers/authors should have always had the ability to "publish and forget" the source code, without having to deal with those "entitlements".
- bbor 5mo ago
  IDK, it's hard to criticize the community too much given how wildly, absurdly successful it is. If I arrived on Earth yesterday and you tried to tell me how much software is Free/free in an otherwise-capitalist economy, I wouldn't believe you! I really really am not trying to start a political argument, but just as food for thought: this is exactly why I have faith in socialism (read: 'prosocial institutions and norms'). And whether socialism is eu- or dys-topian, it certainly cannot happen in the first place without a "social component"!
- locknitpicker 5mo ago
  > The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS. You're confusing things. The "social component" refers to people interacting with each other. Such as two developers working on a bug or a feature. Or a tester reporting a bug. This is a big part of actual professional software development work.
  - troad 5mo ago
    To be generous to OP, none of this is intrinsic to FOSS. I write a library. I put it up online, for other people to use, if they like. At what point did I assume any responsibility to play nice with others? Or work with others at all? There's FOSS licenses, and then there's the social expectations around collaborative online development, and the latter is nowhere implied in the former. FOSS was not historically weighed down with all these social expectations. Forking was not seen as some community failure, but the basic purpose of FOSS. Sites like GitHub were a major part of this shift.
    - account42 5mo ago
      Spot on. And with the slop pull request currently plaguing the open collaboration model I foresee more projects moving (back) to the take-it-or-leave-it model.
      - gchamonlive 5mo ago
        Late to the party, but you can also do KYC on contributors, no need for black and white take it or leave it return to the dark ages.
- marcosdumay 5mo ago
  Yes, what's one more reason to abandon the largest platform.
- nozzlegear 5mo ago
  What do you mean? Why is the social component a problem in FOSS?
  - majorchord 5mo ago
    I assume they are referring to the large number of open source users and developers that are particularly bad at people skills and acting calm and rational. Or maybe they mean there aren't good collaboration platforms in general, not sure.
IanCal 5mo ago
What on earth is the social component of GitHub? I assume I’m missing what’s useful to people here as it keeps getting brought up, but what is it? Is it the stars on a repo? Are people doing something else big with all of this?
- gchamonlive 5mo ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48123524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48123524
  - IanCal 5mo ago
    The vast majority of that doesn’t require anything like GitHub though, that’s just having multiple users. At a push you could have the same thing massively more spread out using GitHub purely as auth.
    - gchamonlive 5mo ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224
      - IanCal 5mo ago
        Totally different thing, and if you don’t want to engage don’t, this is simply rude.
        gchamonlive 5mo ago
        > this is simply rude Look, you are the one that opened with "What on earth is the social component of GitHub?". What's the semantic function of that specific construction if not being completely ironic, like you decided I was wrong before engaging? > if you don’t want to engage don’t I am engaging, you just don't like that I'm not spelling it out. This is perfectly within the community guidelines. > Totally different thing It's just the same thing, you both are ignoring how important convenience is.

MrFurious 5mo ago

The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS.

rapnie 5mo ago
People forget what FOSS is, and you get a world of unclear expectations. FOSS is code + a copyright license. How the code is created is an entirely different matter, and where FOSS projects often fall short. As FOSS projects come Forgejo is well-organized around a community governance model.
- brunoborges 5mo ago
  Indeed, the fact that maintainers didn't have until only recently the control for disabling Pull Requests tab in a GitHub repo, is what drove a lot of issues in FOSS collaboration over the past decade. FOSS and open source licenses never ever granted entitlement for contributors to have their proposals reviewed/merged by maintainers. Neither it ever offered entitlement for users to ask for free support. FOSS is about giving people access to source code so they can do with it whatever they want, and maintainers/authors should have always had the ability to "publish and forget" the source code, without having to deal with those "entitlements".
bbor 5mo ago
IDK, it's hard to criticize the community too much given how wildly, absurdly successful it is. If I arrived on Earth yesterday and you tried to tell me how much software is Free/free in an otherwise-capitalist economy, I wouldn't believe you! I really really am not trying to start a political argument, but just as food for thought: this is exactly why I have faith in socialism (read: 'prosocial institutions and norms'). And whether socialism is eu- or dys-topian, it certainly cannot happen in the first place without a "social component"!
locknitpicker 5mo ago
> The "social component" is a big problem in actual FOSS. You're confusing things. The "social component" refers to people interacting with each other. Such as two developers working on a bug or a feature. Or a tester reporting a bug. This is a big part of actual professional software development work.
- troad 5mo ago
  To be generous to OP, none of this is intrinsic to FOSS. I write a library. I put it up online, for other people to use, if they like. At what point did I assume any responsibility to play nice with others? Or work with others at all? There's FOSS licenses, and then there's the social expectations around collaborative online development, and the latter is nowhere implied in the former. FOSS was not historically weighed down with all these social expectations. Forking was not seen as some community failure, but the basic purpose of FOSS. Sites like GitHub were a major part of this shift.
  - account42 5mo ago
    Spot on. And with the slop pull request currently plaguing the open collaboration model I foresee more projects moving (back) to the take-it-or-leave-it model.
    - gchamonlive 5mo ago
      Late to the party, but you can also do KYC on contributors, no need for black and white take it or leave it return to the dark ages.
marcosdumay 5mo ago
Yes, what's one more reason to abandon the largest platform.
nozzlegear 5mo ago
What do you mean? Why is the social component a problem in FOSS?
- majorchord 5mo ago
  I assume they are referring to the large number of open source users and developers that are particularly bad at people skills and acting calm and rational. Or maybe they mean there aren't good collaboration platforms in general, not sure.

IanCal 5mo ago

What on earth is the social component of GitHub? I assume I’m missing what’s useful to people here as it keeps getting brought up, but what is it? Is it the stars on a repo? Are people doing something else big with all of this?

gchamonlive 5mo ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48123524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48123524
- IanCal 5mo ago
  The vast majority of that doesn’t require anything like GitHub though, that’s just having multiple users. At a push you could have the same thing massively more spread out using GitHub purely as auth.
  - gchamonlive 5mo ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224
    - IanCal 5mo ago
      Totally different thing, and if you don’t want to engage don’t, this is simply rude.
      - gchamonlive 5mo ago
        > this is simply rude Look, you are the one that opened with "What on earth is the social component of GitHub?". What's the semantic function of that specific construction if not being completely ironic, like you decided I was wrong before engaging? > if you don’t want to engage don’t I am engaging, you just don't like that I'm not spelling it out. This is perfectly within the community guidelines. > Totally different thing It's just the same thing, you both are ignoring how important convenience is.