Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's Official: Microsoft Pays Out $7.5 Billion For GitHub, Nat Friedman Becomes The CEO

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    By reading all those comments I figured most of you don't use linux by free choice but from hate to MS. lol.

    Comment


    • #82

      via https://imgur.com/uJdOetI

      Comment


      • #83
        I wonder if Linus Tovalds kept the GitHub shares he was given. He's just become an owner of Microsoft

        Comment


        • #84
          Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
          Can you name a single Microsoft product acquisition where years later, consumers are happy with the outcome? Me neither.
          Acquisitions sometimes turn out well and sometimes not. Microsoft is no exception.

          Some acquisitions I remember:
          Nokia mobile: went bad
          aQuantive: went bad
          LinkedIn: so-so
          Skype: so-so
          Mojang: went well (Minecraft monthly active users grew from 40 million in mid 2016, to 55 million in early 2017, to 75 million in early 2018)
          Connectix: went well (Virtual PC -> Hyper-V now foundation for Azure)
          LinkedIn: Jury is still out on this one

          Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
          Microsoft has a very well earned reputation for their "embrace-extend-extinguish" strategy. History proves they aren't going to "destroy" github per se; they are "merely" going to destroy it as we know it, and 5 years from now it will be unrecognizable.
          EEE applies to Microsoft competitors and their technology.
          That people only now woke up to the fact that GitHub has become a SPOF for much of the open source community, and lots of projects are locked in is interesting. FSF and free software advocates have warned against relying on GitHub for years.

          It's just that Microsoft woke up earlier, and noticed how git has become essential for their business. And given the history that git didn't work well on Windows in the past (due to NTFS being the mess that it is), Microsoft needs to have some leverage over git to ensure that this doesn't happen again.

          Comment


          • #85
            Things will probably be status quo for sometime. I seriously doubt that there is going to be a exodus to other services. Those who are unhappy of course can migrate to Bitbucket or Gitlab. IMO Bitbucket is the much better solution than Github or Gitlab - but of course, it depends on what you're trying to do.

            Comment


            • #86
              Originally posted by svanheulen
              What page are you seeing this on? When I go to a repo on GitLab it only hits 3 domains: gitlab.com, gitlab-static.net, gravatar.com
              I went to gitlab.com and through the account formation pages, and on one or more of them saw Google ad services being blocked in NoScript. If this is not used anywhere in gitlab, this could mean a bug in NoScript hitting this server on one page and showing it on another. I was not on one of the repositories.

              Figured I had better find out right away if I could make an account there. With my militantly aggressive browser ad and tracker blocking, and no Facebook, Google, or US-based email accounts, I have to walk away from the entire "real names" sector of the Internet that uses those accounts as gatekeepers. I wanted to know right away if this was going to be an issue in any migration of projects I work on but do not own away from Github. Account formation worked fine, though I had to do it in Torbrowser because it wanted Google's ReCaptcha. All of Google is blocked in my normal browsers to deny them a surfing history. Maybe ReCaptcha was what tried to load Google Adservices?

              Comment


              • #87
                Keybase is way more secure than Gitlab IMO.

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by gbcox View Post
                  Things will probably be status quo for sometime. I seriously doubt that there is going to be a exodus to other services. Those who are unhappy of course can migrate to Bitbucket or Gitlab. IMO Bitbucket is the much better solution than Github or Gitlab - but of course, it depends on what you're trying to do.
                  Gitlab is seen a 100 fold increase in migrations since the announcement. So there is an exodus question is what percentage. You can expect bitbucket is having the same-thing.

                  Bitbucket has a downside one of the same downsides as github. The difference in licensing between gitlab and bitbucket/github for self hosting is that gitlab is a true open source license for the core. So with gitlab you have a back-up if they get taken over you can absolutely legally run that backup using the open source software. Bitbucket/github you purchase in 12 months contracts and when contract runs out then you could be in trouble using your back-ups.

                  This is why having a open source community version is so good even if it does not have all features. As long as the community version makes your back-ups usable if something goes wrong its ok. Now if you don't have a community version or some contract agreement that you can use the software if they get taken over to use back-ups and the like you are heading down a path of trouble.

                  Bitbucket you really would be in the same set of problems if a third party buys that who is hostile or possibly hostile as github currently.

                  https://rhodecode.com/ there are other options of self hosting. But migrating from github to them is tricky.

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    https://twitter.com/EdgarSanchez/sta...87778760646656

                    (yes I know they're migrating to Google Cloud, mainly because the $20 million funding from Google Ventures was quite convincing, essentially doubling their total funding)

                    btw those who come up with Codeplex as an argument, why don't ever mention Google Code too?
                    Last edited by anarki2; 06 June 2018, 08:14 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      https://gitlab.gnome.org/explore/groups there is more than 1 gitlab. Once in gitlab migrating gitlab to gitlab is straight forwards.

                      Gitlab has been given the ability to self host for free because of the Microsoft problem.

                      Github has been amazon. Still USA company with USA data access rules. Of course with Microsoft taking over you cannot expect that to stay the same. Microsoft will of course want to host on azure and this means migration.. Now what is better a migration that you control or a migration that microsoft does automatically. From hotmail and other examples you don't want to be caught up with a Microsoft auto migration.

                      I said possibly hostile. Microsoft is going to hostile to githubs current operational pattern.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X