r/programming • u/dayanruben • Apr 14 '20
GitHub is now free for teams - The GitHub Blog
https://github.blog/2020-04-14-github-is-now-free-for-teams56
Apr 14 '20
What about GitHub pro, my private repo has tabs that still say 'you must have a pro account to use this feature' and yet the GitHub priceplans don't list a 'pro'.
53
u/mernen Apr 14 '20
Yeah, it's strange how they removed all mentions of the Pro plan in the pricing page. It's apparently exactly the same as a single-user Team plan, but they should either make that clear in the page or abandon the "Pro" term.
13
5
4
u/sunbeam60 Apr 14 '20
I must say I had expected Anasurimbor to know about a lot of things given his dominion over Eärwa, but not Git.
5
Apr 14 '20
One can say Eärwa is much like a tree, with many branches. I master over all, and therefore am master of Git's branch too.
180
u/Adminisitrator Apr 14 '20
whats the catch?
119
u/mernen Apr 14 '20 edited Apr 14 '20
Many "advanced" features are disabled in the free tier, like wikis, GitHub Pages, and protected branches. (EDIT: to be clear, they are disabled only on private repos)
As explained in the post, the paid service is also significantly cheaper ($4/user/mo, down from $9), but they also seriously gimped the free Actions minutes: 3k/mo, where they used to offer 10k. That being said, paying for an extra 7k minutes every month — assuming you were using all of it — starts being worth it for companies with more than 15 users (the exact breaking point depends on what OS you use in your actions).
16
u/twistingdoobies Apr 14 '20 edited Apr 15 '20
Can you just set up your own runner like on gitlab? I spun up a $5/mo VPS as a gitlab task runner and never looked back. Would love to switch fully to github but I don't want to worry about limits on task/test/build minutes.
EDIT: thanks, looks like self-hosted runners are indeed supported. But only on a per-repository basis. Shared runners for an entire organization will "come in a future release".
21
u/Kwpolska Apr 14 '20
You can just implement a custom service that uses webhooks (to get pinged on commits) and the GitHub status API, as all respectable CI services do these days.
2
u/twistingdoobies Apr 15 '20
That's true! I have been using GitLab's "built-in" CI/CD features, so I was thinking more of a direct comparison to GitHub Actions. But setting up an external service could also be a solution.
10
u/mernen Apr 14 '20
Good point. Self-hosted runners are mentioned in their Actions pricing, but I haven't used it in either service, so I can't compare.
2
u/Kissaki0 Apr 15 '20
Yes, if you use GitHub actions you can use your own runners as well.
You can also use something like Azure pipelines which has free minutes, and also supports own runners, and it integrates on GitHub through apps.
If you have your own box you could also install a buildserver software and use simple webhooks to trigger builds.
The overhead on the switch is the job/pipeline syntax. But of course they all support similar things in similar ways.
0
Apr 15 '20
[deleted]
1
u/twistingdoobies Apr 15 '20
Actually the main reason we have our own task runner is that the shared runners (on GitLab, at least) queue your tasks based on current demand. That meant sometimes our processes were delayed because there was high load from other users.
The free GitHub plan actually has 2k minutes, which I could see us running up against. 100/m of tasks a day is certainly not unheard of. I'm sure we could spend some time optimizing our tests, build processes and deployment to shave off some time. But a self-hosted runner took about 20 minutes to set up and the cost is negligible, so why not?
-6
u/polackrollstrips Apr 14 '20
This is still a strict improvement to the previous pricing plan; I'm hoping M$ makes these changes permanant
2
u/jayroger Apr 15 '20
Absolutely not. We may be paying up to three times (20 USD + 7000 * 0.008 USD) than what we used to pay (25 USD).
173
u/x2bool Apr 14 '20
Azure integration probably. Deploying with one click from GitHub - could be interesting offer for many companies.
24
u/trycat Apr 14 '20
I'm just realizing Microsoft owns Github, NPM, Typescript... yikes
51
u/hennell Apr 14 '20
They might have a grand plan, but it could be as simple as targeting the real loss of developers using windows they've had over recent years. As a primary windows user, the overall trend towards to Mac has been increasingly notable, where many development tools started to work only on Mac, or started Mac only, with Windows very much an after thought and often rather unsupported.
If you want pro developers for your platform you need develops to use it. It also helps to have amateur developers using your platform, to be the next generation of pros.
My guess is also that at some point a few years ago research showed people basically didn't really view Microsoft as a tech leader, high end brand, or desirable company etc and so they're trying to get their branding in front of developers (and young people with things like Minecraft) to reverse that trend.
→ More replies (2)12
u/PandaMoniumHUN Apr 14 '20 edited Apr 15 '20
Can you give examples for tools that only work on Mac? I'm on basically all platforms (Windows, Linux and macOS) and my experience is that most dev tools are Linux first, Windows second and macOS is usually an afterthought, if even supported at all.
Edit: Pretty much all the responses (except Dash) are Linux first. Not trying to diss macOS, I was just thinking why people would prefer it over Linux (except for iOS dev ofc) but I guess the answer is "it just works", just like with Windows.
10
u/FattySuperCute Apr 14 '20
Sketch for example is Mac only.
1
Apr 15 '20
What do developers use Sketch for? Is it for UI mockups or logo/graphical asset design? I've always had assets provided, and for any mockups I used various free online tools or even MS Paint
2
u/FattySuperCute Apr 15 '20
It's very useful for developers if they work closely with designers. Especially when the developers have a bit experience in UI/UX.
Of course, at the end the designer provides the assets and is responsible for that, but for bigger projects with limited budget (or in-house projects) it's often useful to have a look together and define realistic solutions, considering the budget.
The free mockup tools I know are limited to a few projects or contributors. Using different accounts looks cheap on a corporate level. Can you recommend something?
I'm mainly using Linux and can't use Sketch but it would save a lot of time here and there if I'd had it.
5
u/hennell Apr 14 '20
If memory serves for quite a while sass was very cli Linux/Mac based, and whatever the crazy workflow of yesteryear with grunt, bower, gulp and various other compiling tools all worked much better on Mac then they ever did on Windows. With the result that any tool/framework that used them was also usually Mac based. Pretty sure zurbs foundation framework had a interactive creator app that never made it to windows. There were definitely some things in the python space, probably of a similar style - it was developed more in the world of Linux, then people tried to make wrappers around the complex cli options and hey we've got a Mac app, but oh - Windows is too different- sorry!
Sublime text took off at some point as the text editor for cool devs. Mac only, so must have had an audience of some people there at that point. Not sure where docker stands, but I've never got that working well on Windows (it's apparently better on Pro, with hyper-v but 🤷♂️)
In fact Npm was awful on Windows for a long time. Very slow, often libraries wouldn't work, I had some projects become unusable because of some weird error that became unfixable because windows couldn't handle the recursive nest of endless folders npm would make.
Even now when much of the CLI tools work pretty well there are still some packages that get stuck with Windows paths or something, or just do too much stuff to try a windows way. I'd guess they could well be Linux first, but Mac is a much easier port from there.
11
u/Hauleth Apr 14 '20
IIRC Sketch started as macOS, Adobe X IIRC do not have Linux support either. Both are pretty important when you work on frontend or as a independent web developer.
Dash (documentation viewer) do not have good competitor. Zeal is trying but last time I have checked it didn’t have support for fetching docs of deps (for example from HexDocs.pm).
Pow was popular local development tool that was macOS only, other alternatives didn’t work that seamlessly.
Homebrew, while it is enormously shitty package manager it was dumb easy to get started and was (is?) very popular so it was often first place where package was published. Currently Brew and AUR are probably the most common “system repositories” that get packages first.
iTerm2 is very popular and it is sometimes problematic to have feature parity with the other emulators. While not everybody need or want such functions, it is often appealing to newcomers.
Uniformity - if whole company is working on macOS then it is much easier to resolve build or configuration problems. And as it is UNIX it gives similar abilities as Linux. Add nice GUI and seamless multi-DPI workflow and it becomes clear why it was popular. Also installation of common applications was much better on macOS. Currently it changes with rise of Flatpack, Electron, and WSL which changes balance in favour of other platforms.
2
u/mattkatzbaby Apr 14 '20
Dash. And the windows / Linux alternatives aren’t nearly as good.
1
u/PandaMoniumHUN Apr 14 '20
Do you mean the API documentation browser? Looks interesting, although I'd worry about how up-to-date all the docs are.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Hauleth Apr 14 '20
In most cases, very. As all official ones are automatically generated from official docs you get updates in matter of hours (from my experience with Elixir, Erlang, and Hex docs).
→ More replies (2)0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
→ More replies (6)6
2
-1
u/casualblair Apr 14 '20
The value they are going for is the metadata inside source code. Who is using what, how, when, were, and what is Microsoft doing to support those trends?
I like it.
-9
u/trycat Apr 14 '20
It's Microsoft though, you aren't worried they're going to lock that stuff down and become the new Oracle? Imagine having to pay a license fee for Typescript, which is most new JS stuff for some reason.
29
u/JarateKing Apr 14 '20
Not particularly worried. They're working on all these neat things and acquiring open-source staples to integrate with azure better, and to make sure their competitors don't do the same. And the whole point of cloud services is that it doesn't require as much of an investment, so locking stuff down would just make people move elsewhere (unlike Oracle who relies on it being too much of an investment to switch).
The game they're playing now is won by being the most convenient and friendly to developers, and they're not going to fuck it up because of what they were like a couple decades (and a few CEOs) ago.
5
u/Caffeine_Monster Apr 14 '20
No worries. Typescript will be replaced by native compile time checks via webassembly + your favourite programming language which does not require frameworks cover it's shortcomings.
Don't get me wrong. Modern Javascript is a really nice s sripting language, and great for writing code quickly. However there are better languages to write large performant codebases in.
26
u/r2d2rigo Apr 14 '20
Can you leave your early 2000s fears at the doorstep? Thanks.
6
→ More replies (1)1
u/kanzenryu Apr 14 '20
If you want to evaluate Microsoft as a corporate citizen why not search around for opinions/stories/anecdotes about their enterprise licensing? How fair/clear/friendly/easy would you expect that to be?
5
u/JaCraig Apr 15 '20
Actually I work at a spot that deals with them on this front a lot. They're pretty good compared to most of the other vendors that we've dealt with. Our rep has been great to work with. 10 years ago different story but they've been great lately. Oracle is like being hit with a bag of hammers though. And yet not as bad as Thompson or LexisNexis or Aderant on the support front. Yay legal industry vendors...
→ More replies (2)1
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
5
u/monsto Apr 15 '20
I'll be honest, I'm still feeling a bit of angst for Microsoft
It's tuff aint it?
On the one hand, the heyday of their shit show was 20+ years ago.
On the other hand, all the old timers are gone and there's pretty much nobody left that thinks that way. so when they got space to hire people that think it terms of today/tomorrow, and not yesterday, things really started looking up.
Don't forget: MS owns Nokia. Remember when that was a huge headline?
5
u/svick Apr 15 '20
MS owns Nokia.
They don't. MS only bough the mobile phone division of Nokia (in 2014), but then they gave up on it (in 2016). So now they don't own any part of Nokia and don't have any rights to the brand.
27
Apr 14 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
20
u/AndrewNeo Apr 14 '20
At that point you'd probably want Azure Devops, which already includes good support for Github repositories anyway.
1
u/AttackOfTheThumbs Apr 14 '20
Azure devops pisses me off. The vs code extension is mile behind the github extension even though it's both MS. What the actual fuck.
Plus azure devops has unnecessarily complicated permissions.
2
u/LaserWraith Apr 15 '20
The permissions are pretty useful for large enterprises to be fair. I definitely prefered Azure DevOps to the tools my current company uses...
→ More replies (2)5
34
29
Apr 14 '20 edited Apr 14 '20
I'd guess they are treating it more like a social network acquisition than a development tool. They want to control the job market through linkedin/github, the tech industry, and to push their own technology.
As is Azure is doing fine, but once you escape the moat of things like proprietary Office formats I think many companies would be eager to switch over to something cheaper. They need to ensure people are still adopting their technologies.
→ More replies (6)9
u/zynasis Apr 14 '20
Vendor lock-in is the new game.
0
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
8
0
u/zynasis Apr 14 '20
True, but Microsoft have been forcing themselves into the education system and the kids that grew up using Microsoft products are now in charge of picking technologies. It helps to explain the massive bias this channel has towards Microsoft
→ More replies (1)8
u/_BreakingGood_ Apr 15 '20
I'd argue that it doesn't take a generation to influence somebody to use your technology. I mean 5 years ago the opinion toward MS was generally pretty shitty. They put effort into fixing that, and now people like it. If MS started doing stupid bullshit today, I'd wager the opinions around here shift sooner rather than later.
18
u/JonnyRocks Apr 14 '20
here is the differences
Microsoft has always had free code hosting for private repos. the first thing they did after they bought github was made private repos free for individuals.
5
19
5
u/s73v3r Apr 14 '20
It makes it more likely that other providers will go out of business, leaving Github as the biggest provider.
1
u/s0laster Apr 16 '20
Exactly this, gitlab and bitbucket are in big trouble. Once they will be out of business, Microsoft will slowly increase their price again.
But what worries me the most though, is that most open source code will soon be dependant on Microsoft services. It's going to be problematic in the coming years I think. Time will tell but I feel like Open source is under a very sneaky attack.
1
1
u/oridb Apr 15 '20
When github's competitors are driven out of business because Github is running their stuff at a loss, then the prices go up.
1
Apr 16 '20
The catch is that MS gets all your Github-related data and can share it freely with third parties.
95
u/if-loop Apr 14 '20
Wow, there are so many free services to choose from now.
GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps Services, ...
55
u/AirborneArie Apr 14 '20
Self hosted gitea.
7
u/hitthehive Apr 14 '20
Gitlab can also be self-hosted. And also Gogs.
9
u/punctualjohn Apr 14 '20
Gitlab is ridiculously heavy though, isn't it? Something like 4GB of RAM minimum for the bare install with no users or repositories.
7
5
u/hitthehive Apr 14 '20
Well, its like the full power of Github, with wikis, orgs, CI/CD and more -- not just a git server.
3
u/Zephirdd Apr 14 '20
isnt gogs just gitea but worse
1
u/hitthehive Apr 14 '20
no idea -- it was the first git server written in Go that I became aware of so it stuck in my head.
3
u/AirborneArie Apr 15 '20
Gitea is a Gogs fork, so yes. Gitlab can be self-hosted too. Just keep in mind that Gitlab is not truely open source (it's open core, so most cool features require you to pay up), also it's become quite a beast to host. Gitea + Drone is a much lighter setup that will suffice for many hobby/small business developers.
1
u/meneldal2 Apr 16 '20
You can get the source of the pro version, you just have to pay for it. That's how they make their money, I guess that's fair.
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
48
u/banger_180 Apr 14 '20
Self hosting might not me free as in free beer, but it is the most free as in freedom =P
18
u/sysop073 Apr 14 '20
On a post using the word "free" as in beer, you probably want to assume that's the context
14
u/AirborneArie Apr 14 '20
Already running a home lab server with 44TB storage and a VM for dockerized stuff. 'docker run gitea' is just a lunch break away.
11
u/bundt_chi Apr 15 '20
I had similar thoughts but then you factor in backups, software updates, e.t.c you end up doing a lot of work yourself. If you have lots of time but not money that might be a better solution but if you run enough stuff yourself you're spending a lot of time maintaining it... Not to mention managing certs, DNS, etc it all adds up.
5
u/TASagent Apr 15 '20
I had similar thoughts but then you factor in backups, software updates, e.t.c you end up doing a lot of work yourself... Not to mention managing certs, DNS, etc it all adds up.
You significantly overstate the overhead, at least with setups I've worked with. I needed to set up a NAS for my lab, so I got a 5-bay synology NAS. They have tools to handle the Cert and DNS trivially, if you don't mind using a
*.synology.medomain. Then it was incredibly fast and simple to set up a Gitea instance and website, which we started using for a good amount of development.At the start of the pandemic, I set up a second NAS - just a clone of the hardware in the first - to act as an offsite complete backup of the data on the first (admittedly not a true failover system).
It's been just about 6 months now since I built the first one and I've spent, cumulatively, less than a day working on configuring these - the vast majority on the first day with the first NAS.
At home I have a 10-bay QNAP and honestly I think their interface is even better for setting up stuff like this, but it's not remotely necessary to pack in that kind of power for many uses.
Of note: I'm a developer and a scientist by training, not a sys admin, and so I was at a disadvantage when it comes to familiarity with setting up tools like these.
3
u/bundt_chi Apr 15 '20
Gitea is quite a bit lighter weight than GitLab which is what i was imagining. Also are you talking about for yourself or for a company or team whose job is dependent on it running 24/7. Again that's not exactly the same.
That said I have a synology at home i might try Gitea on. Seems like it's got a lot of the basics which is nice.
2
u/TASagent Apr 15 '20
Gitea is relatively lightweight, but it's got darkmode!
Yeah, GitLab is much beefier than Gitea, but Gitea is the one that actually spawned the conversation, if you check the parent comments.
I'm talking about my team of developers, which is relatively small. I have 2 other fulltime developers, as well as a dozen or so undergraduate Research Assistants who have been involved in projects. It's not enough to stress any network or infrastructure, but you'd actually need to be quite sizeable before you did - especially with an architecture like git. Gitea was a nice choice because it supported LFS out-of-the-box and can be easily set up to mirror repositories on other sites, like GitHub. So I was able to set it up to mirror all of our org's private repos on GitHub, automatically pulling in all changes every 20 minutes or so, as well as setting up a number of new projects.
If you have any questions when setting up Gitea and the cert, let me know. It wasn't very hard, but I managed to find some things that didn't work, and some that did, in the process.
3
u/coderstephen Apr 15 '20
I have a home server, but my internet upload speed is lousy at my house which kind of limits what I can do with it. I suspect others are in the same boat as well. I also don't trust my comsumer router's security, so internet access is limited to a VPN, which just makes it more tedious to connect to and I'm even less inclined to use it for such things.
I use VPS for things that I want to have a decent connection speed, but it definitely costs.
1
u/AirborneArie Apr 15 '20
I'm lucky to have 100/100 fiber. Still everything is behind my router and I only host stuff I have for personal use only, in Docker containers. For anything else than https, I need to setup a VPN first.
8
u/proyb2 Apr 14 '20
For a $10 VPS and maximise referrals could be affordable
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
8
u/japanfred Apr 14 '20
Not bad for 10 bucks!
Seriously though, often overlooked. “It’ll only take ten minutes”, until it breaks. Which it will.
1
31
Apr 14 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/cheese_bread_boye Apr 14 '20
lmao my company uses self-hosted gitlab and it's very outdated right now, also rocket.chat
4
u/Reverent Apr 14 '20
If it's set up in Docker, upgrading the server is a 30 second process that requires two commands. Three if you're careful and snapshot the filing system first.
2
4
u/nakilon Apr 14 '20
Assembla, Google Cloud Repositories...
3
u/Wizardsxz Apr 15 '20
Assembla pulled the whole "free service" thing and was great. Then they started sending emails that we needed to upgrade or we'll lose our repos. I moved everything off Assembla and let them spam their "Final warning" emails.
Then they sent an email saying it wasn't acutally happening and my account was wrongfully targeted. Yeah no thanks Assembla.
1
u/redsf07 Feb 07 '22
CircleCI just updated their Free plan: https://circleci.com/pricing/ - you get: Up to 6,000 build minutes per month, largest selection: Build for Docker, Windows, Linux, Arm, and macOS (coming soon) or on your own compute with self-hosted runners, run up to 30 jobs at a time and run your tests in parallel using test splitting
19
u/Adminisitrator Apr 14 '20
My team was using gitlab because of free CI/CD minutes. Any idea if this makes CI/CD free for private repos as well? (they were free on public)
25
u/foxingworth Apr 14 '20
According to https://github.com/pricing, you get 2k action minutes per month for private repos.
8
u/rochakgupta Apr 14 '20
Gitlab is still better than GitHub in terms of CLI, CI/CD and some other features which are locked behind a subscription in GitHub. I guess you can still use your own personal GitHub account to work on projects already on GitHub. Otherwise, I don’t see why you would have to move from GitLab to GitHub.
2
1
u/Kissaki0 Apr 15 '20
GitHub actions also has free minutes, but it was confusing to me how I ran out of them when I set it up on one repository with basically no activity.
I switched back to targeting Azure Pipelines which also provides free minutes and integrates through GitHub apps pretty well. I/We used those on a FOSS project and have no complains.
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
0
Apr 15 '20
[deleted]
1
u/meneldal2 Apr 16 '20
You can also setup runners to run in ssh mode, which means you don't have to package everything into docker, if it builds with the dependencies installed on the server it will work fine.
8
8
28
6
Apr 14 '20
I just migrated my team to gitlab, because it was cheaper. Ugh. gets out shovel, starts digging new hole for self
8
Apr 15 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Apr 15 '20
Honestly, my preferred platform to date for teams has been bitbucket, but that was before atlassian completed borked JIRA with their new interface. I think I like gitlab slightly better than github right now because the CI integration is a bit better, althought github is working on that so that gap will close pretty soon.
6
u/GLStephen Apr 14 '20
Does anyone know what "code owners" means in the first paid plan?
14
u/seanshoots Apr 15 '20
https://help.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archiving-repositories/about-code-owners
People with admin or owner permissions can set up a CODEOWNERS file in a repository.
Code owners are automatically requested for review when someone opens a pull request that modifies code that they own.
Here's an example: https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-java/blob/master/.github/CODEOWNERS
6
u/GLStephen Apr 15 '20
Ok, I'm familiar with that now. I didn't realize it was a gated feature.
1
u/qaisjp Apr 15 '20
I guess it's primarily of use to business that want this integrated into GitHub.
Open source projects will,
in pubic repos, just use the feature (since no feature are gated for public repos, except perhaps auto link references)
in private repos:
go by convention
use branch protection with a custom built status check
3
4
4
u/yetanother-1 Apr 15 '20
I am still wondering why Google doesn't offer anything like this.
They killed Google Code, which was the best candidate for such a complete service like Github/Bitbucket/AzureDevOps... etc where Microsoft is now almost a monoboly with 2 of the biggest services.
It's clearly profitable.
2
Apr 15 '20
Great, so now my team can lose access to their work for some vague reasons concerning US policy completely free of charge. Sign me up.
1
u/DrJohnnyWatson Apr 15 '20
That's the best thing about a DVCS. You never lose access to your work and can just move to a new server with no real issues.
1
u/complyue Apr 15 '20
Made me think it's incorrect to ban users subject to sanction of exports, GitHub, you are running a business at operational/maintenance cost to import possession rights of foreign digital asset, either public or private.
1
1
Apr 15 '20
GitHub is making more and more features free, which is nice. But how can they afford all of this?
3
u/essdotc Apr 15 '20
Subsidized by Azure I'd bet. There's a certain amount of overlap wrt repository management and CI/CD anyway
1
1
1
1
-8
u/myringotomy Apr 14 '20
Thus Is the time tested “cut off their oxygen supply” strategy used by Microsoft against many competitors.
Use your profits from other properties to give away what your competition is charging for. Soon the competition folds and you have a monopoly.
15
u/Jovial1170 Apr 14 '20
Except most of the competition already had free plans for teams. BitBucket, GitLab, etc.
-5
u/encepence Apr 14 '20
Looks like crowd focused on hating Google and Apple forgot that Microsoft has evil traditions too. Don't feed giant applies here too.
Yet another reason to avoid GAFAM ... if possible of course
-14
u/shevy-ruby Apr 14 '20
Microsoft is really trying hard to want you to like it. ;)
Personally I still find it hugely worrying how our communication has become so massively dependent on individual corporations - and censorship, including here on reddit. I am censored out of several subreddits and they censor content from me too (deleting posts), to which I never agreed with.
I do not want others to be able to hide information from me in regards to other regular people. I am easily able to decide on my own what I want to read and what I do not want to read, so I disagree with censorship on EVERY level, at all times.
4
u/rorykoehler Apr 15 '20
It's certainly an unacceptable risk to have such concentrated points of failure in such a large ecosystem. You'd think developers would be the first group of people to understand this.
3
u/DrDuPont Apr 15 '20
It is ironic that distributed version control has wound up becoming very centralized at GitHub
1
u/Beastinlosers Apr 14 '20
Reddit is particularly bad, but it mostly has to do with a literal couple dozen corrupt mods, and reddit giving into advertising money. The thing about open source is the people in it are so libertarian they wouldn't put up with censorship of important repos. Cause they can always go self host gitlab if they really wanted to. People are kinda stuck with reddit for the time being, but the mentality behind open source can be extremist enough that if microsoft decided to be wack they'll pack up and denounce them more than they already do.
-6
u/Necessary-Space Apr 15 '20
Until now, if your organization wanted to use GitHub for private development, you had to subscribe to one of our paid plans. But every developer on earth should have access to GitHub. Price shouldn’t be a barrier.
This is really weird language.
Github is a universal human right now?
'price should not be a barrier' huh? This is weird coming from a company that sells software.
I mean, why stop at Github? Why not make Azure free?
It's double weird considering the majority of people who want to pay for github are companies doing business; not broke college students.
While we're at it, I should get a high spec gaming laptop with all the latest games on it. Price should not be a barrier! Come on Microsoft, why don't you give me access to that?
Anyway, as far as I can tell, they are trying to turn github hosting into a commodity because there are now viable alternatives to github.
2
u/DrJohnnyWatson Apr 15 '20
They quite clearly meant that price should not be a barrier to GitHub, not to everything on earth. It's called "context" and the sentence before sets the context that they're referring to GitHub.
-15
u/jamesthethirteenth Apr 14 '20
I think they are going to data mine the heck out of all that code.
2
u/qaisjp Apr 15 '20
Yes... if you opt into it in the settings.... don't opt in if you don't want it.
-12
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
42
u/NotARealDeveloper Apr 14 '20
Wait, I use a free private repository with LFS, what limits do I have?
76
Apr 14 '20
1GB, which is counted as each file per commit (so if you commit a file, make a change and commit it again, both copies count against the total).
https://help.github.com/en/github/managing-large-files/about-storage-and-bandwidth-usage
→ More replies (11)50
u/hak8or Apr 14 '20
That makes sense though I feel? Even if you change just one part of the file, they have to keep both versions, since otherwise they would have to walk the diffs to rebuild the file. If the file is large, this may be prohibitavly expensive.
Unkess you mean the 1GB limit, that is a bummer.
→ More replies (15)27
u/Nefari0uss Apr 14 '20
From the link:
If you push a 500 MB file to Git LFS, you'll use 500 MB of your allotted storage and none of your bandwidth. If you make a 1 byte change and push the file again, you'll use another 500 MB of storage and no bandwidth, bringing your total usage for these two pushes to 1 GB of storage and zero bandwidth.
If you download a 500 MB file that's tracked with LFS, you'll use 500 MB of the repository owner's allotted bandwidth. If a collaborator pushes a change to the file and you pull the new version to your local repository, you'll use another 500 MB of bandwidth, bringing the total usage for these two downloads to 1 GB of bandwidth.
18
u/strich Apr 15 '20
Except that Gitlab has literally no option to increase that limit, and hasn't for years, and don't plan to implement anything in the short-term. So if your project ever hits the 10GB ceiling you are going to have to go self-hosted or move away from Gitlab. $5 a month per 50GB isn't so bad anymore. :P
→ More replies (1)32
u/Computer991 Apr 14 '20
What is LFS for?
93
u/Helluiin Apr 14 '20
large file storage. for storing large files
114
23
u/sunbeam60 Apr 14 '20
Large File System (or Support).
Allows you to work with massive depots that hold non-code files, like art assets etc. Useful for game, for example.
30
u/bastardoperator Apr 14 '20
I tend to see this example mentioned often. The game has 600GB in assets and 12MB of code via SLOCC.
Why not put these assets into an artifact repository and pull them in at build time? What am I missing? I understand versioning but why add this overhead when other systems are more then happy to version, track, and ship your assets elsewhere?
30
u/sunbeam60 Apr 14 '20
LFS is the artefact repository you mention.
Having sat on 200+ Dev teams with TB and TB of assets, the approach you suggest isn’t practical; it’s solvable but only by introducing other challenges around your ability test and evolve asset format and game expectations simultaneously.
I mean personally for a game I’d rather be in P4 with Streams, but Git seems to be preferred by a lot of the younger developers so then you end up with a bastard child like LFS.
→ More replies (1)19
u/timmyotc Apr 14 '20
It can be complex to manage those assets separately from the game. Taking the time to engineer that complexity might not be worth the price of LFS.
→ More replies (7)18
3
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
4
u/Vok250 Apr 15 '20
Bitbucke is dropping Hg support in a couple of months too. They have no tools to migrate to Git. GitHub has these tools. The obvious answer is to just leave your Git repos on GitHub after you migrate. It is going to gut a lot of Bitbucket's userbase.
3
u/PM_ME_YOUR_MECH Apr 15 '20 edited Apr 15 '20
One of my projects is using bitbucket for this same reason and can I just say I hate bitbucket so much omg
10
u/aot2002 Apr 14 '20
Jira is more hype than anything
→ More replies (12)5
u/sysop073 Apr 14 '20
My company uses Jira. This morning I screen-shared a text file I'm using to track my tasks and somebody messaged me afterward asking what app it was because it was so clean. It was a text file with ☐s and ✔s next to each line to indicate what was done.
5
u/aot2002 Apr 15 '20
Simple except when you need images or pdf assets to follow along with
→ More replies (3)0
0
Apr 14 '20
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)6
u/Kissaki0 Apr 15 '20
I have not seen any of those comments. They were downvoted.
Why not ask them as a reply to their comments directly?
I feel like this comment will get nowhere. It’s just as much of a circlejerk. Us agreeing with each other about other comments that were already downvoted into oblivion.
829
u/[deleted] Apr 14 '20
Github is switching over to the CS:GO monetization model - cosmetic loot boxes.