Are you guys fine with these new shenanigans from Github. I found a bug and wanted to check what has been the development on that, only to find out most of the discussion was hidden by github and requesting me to sign-in to view it.

It threw me straight back to when Microsoft acquired Github and the discussions around the future of opensource on a microsoft owned infrastructure, now microsoft is exploiting free work from the community to train its AI, and building walls around its product, are open source contributors fine with that ?

  • redfellow
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I self-host GitBucket, and honestly your reasoning behind giving up arguably the best version control application, just because of one hosting site, is downright ludicrous.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yeah, I stand by my stance that Microsoft has poisoned the whole Git experience, where everyone will be comparing all forges to MS GitHub & the direction of the Git project ship is being steered heavily by Microfsoft. I also disagree with “best” VCS—I will agree with Git having currently the most/best tooling around it which can lead to a better overall experience, but Git’s fundamentals are not without some obvious flaws.

      • redfellow
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        It hasn’t. There are literally thousands and thousands of developers using Git daily without having nothing to do with GitHub.

        You are entitled to your opinion, but that’s a fact. What MS does or doesn’t, with GitHub, has no effect on these devs. You can see how egregious it is to read a random person sayint we should stop using a certain tool, because Walmart also uses it? Jeesh.

        • toastal@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I would venture while thousands use Git without MS GitHub, 98% have an account since you largely can’t contribute to many projects without due to lock-in.

          If Walmart was the biggest funder, making the most calls to the project, & optimizing it to be sold in their stores, I would 100% have hesitance against something if I could find an alternative (physical vs. digital goods working a bit different).

          It’s not that I don’t see your point, it’s just that I’m pessimistic that the open source community at large would in practice move off of MS GitHub or otherwise offer alternative contribution channels before we would see another tool + platform supplant Git as the status quo in the next generation of VCSs. I would rather accelerate that future—unless like Google or Facebook is the clear leader of that new tool, but many projects right now not named Jujutsu seem to be independent.

          • redfellow
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            The great majority of developers never contribute, that’s a false expectation. Majority of programmers work in the private sector and use local git hosts/solutions instead of GitHub.

            Again, expecting those devs to not use git because of one hoster, is a ludicrous idea in itself.

            • toastal@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Open source drives that ecosystem & the private sector follows suit as the developers try new tools & suggest platforms from their open source experience. There are a lot of companies on MS GitHub Enterprise as well as opening some of there source in the form of libraries & they all choose Microsoft for marketing reasons over technical ones (Git is just Git after all).

              You are acting like I’m saying “leave Git now or else”. I suggest it could be an option, if IMO a faster option, to get out Microsoft’s of monopoly. It’s easier to pitch as better tool with better features that solve problems than argue “well, ethically, you just self-host or move to Codeberg since user freedom matters”. That philosophical argument is harder to preach than Fossil ports the whole forge + tooling ecosystem with your project or Darcs/Pijul solve the merge conflict order of patches not commuting or Mercurial offers a more user-friend CLI.