4 ms·
Is it that ironic? Git is inherently decentralised, github is just a publication method. Everybody's repo is still good if github gets nuked and can be used as
by frossie 13y ago
Is it that ironic? Git is inherently decentralised, github is just a publication method. Everybody's repo is still good if github gets nuked and can be used as the new public. It's nothing like, say, Facebook where They Have All The Data And You Don't. Self-hosting with Gitlab is no different, except to have the public repo sit on a different server.
- phaer 13y agoIts not just a publication method. If you loose your github repo for some reason you loose * the issues * the wiki * the community because your local repo is fine, but nobody knows any other remote than github.
- amirmc 13y agoGood points. However: Issues - I'm sure these can get recreated, even the discussions. In many cases, people will have those threads in their email. Wiki - In Github's case, this is also a git repo. Community - GitHub is rarely the only mechanism used to manage a community. There's likely a domain name and mailing list of some form. Losing all of the above is certainly painful but I'm trying to point out that it's not irrecoverable. A better question might be how painful would it be to lose that (and the likelihood of losing it) as compared to other options.
- phaer 13y agoYes the wiki is a git repo, but the percentage of people who have a (current) checkout of their project wiki is probably below 0.1% of all users. Larger project have a domain and a mailinglist but github hosts thousands of small projects which do not exist outside of it, and in theory it should be trivial to keep a second remote and put it in the readme or sync it over git in some way.
- foobarian 13y agoYou know, sourceforge was once the place to be for hosting your SVN projects, forums, etc., and nobody batted an eye when they ceased to be the community centroid. Similarly with github, if it shut down or something new and shinier came along the projects would move there before you could say "merge conflict."
- warfangle 13y agoAnd now I dread seeing a sourceforge link on a project site. Absolutely, chest-clenchingly dread.
- avar 13y agoYou're right about the issues, I wish GitHub used some plain-text format with an optional UI for that (e.g. plain org-mode files), but the wiki on GitHub is just a plain Git repo with Markdown files, it's not centralized. I don't see how you lose the community more than with any hosting method. If GitHub were nuked off the face of the earth you have all the contributors in your Git history, just send them a mail with the new location of the repo.
- yeukhon 13y agoYou are missing the whole point being that if github is own and assume core developers don't have t latest opt you are screed. If you want to promote your idea, get to. Sage. Don use github and show people your new decentralized github clone.
- oscargrouch 13y agoYou guys are bullying him without a proper reason.. cause they (redecentralize.org) are not creating the technologies themselves.. they are just making the efforts and projects of others public and organized.. therefore they dont need to do this sort of thing themselves.. Their goal are being achieved: To spread the word about projects that can create a descentralized internet.. So, can we please give them a break, and the credits for their nice work?
- saraid216 13y agoIt's become pretty standard on HN that publishing on Github gets you flamed.
- frewsxcv 13y agoA bit of a stretch, but each GitHub wiki is also a git repository