TBF, they could probably make the “releases” page more prominent rather than having it buried in all the “code” stuff.
GitHub has bad UX for people who just wanna download and use the programs
I’d agree, but the caveat is that github is primarily about an interface for source control and collaboration between developers for projects. The release page is really just an also-ran in terms of importance.
Imo they aren’t even trying, because it’s not that hard to make it better. Doesn’t even have to be a compromise. Most people just need a visible download button for the programs, that’s all.
If that’s a concern for the project maintainers, they should create a homepage for the project with download links.
Or make a shortcut/link in the readme to the newest release of the most popular OS’s.
A decent release page tends to contain all kinds of files for different OS, so ‘regular’ people who just want the .deb or .exe would likely become confused regardless.
Imagine how many download buttons would be if Github had ads.
There is, it’s literally right there on the home page of the project. You can either copy a URL and download it by cloning the git repo, or you can download the whole project as a zip file. Then you just have to compile it!
GitHub is for developers, not end users.
It’s not a compromise to make another download button for the last release as well. No one looses.
That’s not a download button for the program. But there is indeed a link to the release page right on the home page of the project, so you’re still correct.
SourceForge had a better UX for those who just want to download software.
And SF is horrible, so this says a lot.
Excel has a bad UX for people who want to use it to make art
Do most people who use Excel also make art with it? Because sometimes devs also just download exe files on GitHub :D
They don’t just always copy code from there.
GitHub, Inc. (/ˈɡɪthʌb/[a]) is a developer platform that allows developers to create, store, manage and share their code
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub
Yes it has other functions too, but it’s primarily for code.
Do MOST people who use GitHub download .exes? In my experience the VAST majority of people are using it for source and version control, not external releases. The overwhelming majority. FOSS and OSS is a small portion of the overall GitHub user base compared to, say, enterprise companies.
So you never downloaded a program on GitHub?
No one everever said you need to compromise its focus on developers. There is no compromise to be made. It’s just a stupid button. Stop arguing lol.
The github project page is for developers, and Github already gives you tons of ways to make a user website. Don’t ask your users to visit github.com/group/project, make them visit group.github.io/project, like any sane person.
Same with Gitlab, BTW.
And if you don’t like the full static site, use the wiki, or guide your users in the first paragraphs of the README so they find the user information if they must.
We’re talking about how to design one of the biggest platforms on the internet. Of course there is a compromise. No one is advocating for removing the button, but arguing that the UI is somehow deficient for people wanting to download binaries is really missing the purpose of GitHub.
It’s an additional feature of GitHub that literally everyone uses. Therefore it has purpose. I think it’s ridiculous to argue against it.
Explain to me how developers or the UI would suffer from easier access to releases?
you never downloaded a program on GitHub
Precompiled binaries?!? Not even once. It’s a security risk akin to picking up gum on the sidewalk for a fun tasty treat.
Cool, I’m not surprised as we are on Lemmy. Welcome to the 1%.
No, you shouldn’t really be downloading exe’s from github. It is widely being used to spread malware and to pretend that the software is open source when it is not. At least look for a link to the store page(including microsoft store), a distro-specific package or build instructions. Those usually have an AV scan or at least harder to fake.
But if you want to put a some text and pictures in very specific locations and never worry about them suddenly jumping into random places, Excel is actually better than Word. That’s why people tend to use Excel for all sorts of weird purposes like that. Unlike with Word, things actually stay where you put them.
Yes and there are definitely people who use excel for art. Just like there are people who use GitHub for its releases page. It’s just not the primary use of either program.
I’ve seen some of the impressive pixel artworks people have made in Excel. However, I prefer to do Excel art by writing a bunch of wild functions and drawing a stacked line chart from the resulting data. The graph itself is the artwork, while the cells behind it are just a necessary part of the process.
not only the ux, some devs make it absurdly confusing to find a binary.
I don’t want to throw anyone under the bus, but there’s this one niche app.
their github releases at one point were YEARS out of date, they only linked to the current version in seemingly random issue reports’ comments. And the current versions were some daily build artefacts you could find in a navigation tree many clicks deep in some unrelated website. And you’d better be savvy enough to download a successfully built artefact too. And even then the downloaded .zip contained all kinds of fluff unnescessary for using the app.
The app worked fine, sure, but actually obtaining it was fairly tricky, tbh.
These build artefacts probably weren’t meant for end users, that’s why they contained the “unnecessary fluff”.
absolutely, but they were in general (IIRC) suggesting them for the main downloads, but just not telling anyone outside the comments, which was the weird part
I’ve bounced off GitHub more than once trying to figure out how to download the .exe file that I assumed must be somewhere. Honestly I still don’t understand the interface and I’ve submitted bug reports for Jeroba on there. I might have even used GitHub for a project once? Every time I look at it it’s overwhelming and confusing and none of it is self-explanatory. But, that’s fairly true for a lot of stuff in programming.
If there is an exe, it’s under the releases link. On desktop it’s on the right sidebar below “About”. On mobile it’s at the bottom after the readme blurb.
It’s not obvious because the code is the main focus and GitHub would much rather people host their releases somewhere else.
And even if releases are hosted on github, there should ideally be a download links page somewhere that presents the different binaries or installation files in an easier to understand format, especially if the software is designed for non-developers.
That’s where it is? I’ve been sneaking my way in by clicking
tagsand then thereleasestoggle!
GitHub has bad UX for a lot of things
That’s not really what it’s designed for though
It doesn’t have to be a compromise imo. Most people just need a visible download button on the front pages. Wouldn’t hurt devs at all. I mean, even devs sometimes struggle with this lol.
It doesn’t have to be a compromise
You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.
Any change to appease you would be a compromise, you understand this, yes?
I swear they move the link to release page every few months.
They purposely hide it, because they don’t wanna tend to normies
Worst part is that this used to be a separate tab in the repo navigation. I still cannot conceive of a reason why they would move it from there to some random heading in the middle of the screen, except maybe so they can sell more GitHub trainings.
I think you’re on to something haha
This is really bad on mobile too. I usually flip to desktop mode to get to releases page quickly.
I agree. Whenever I link someone I try to make sure to link directly to the release page.
Honestly, releases and the readme could be the first page on their own, you can push the code to another tab as long as the clone button is there. There’s at most a 5% chance I’m just gonna raw dog the code straight from the browser anyways.
On mobile, they hide the code by default. Though the releases are still hidden underneath the readme.
Sherlock is command line only too…
Follow up post.
“I don’t want to write a fucking essay nerds! Just make a GUI and put it in an .EXE!!!1111111111 spittle sp[pzpzzzzzzzqawjpoidqweiofrjowqefj”
If they pay me more, I’ll make them one in Visual Basic and trace an IP address.
Skill issue tbh
“why doesn’t this python command line script have an executable ui?”
Why is this executable web UI distributed as a python script?
Why do I have to have python installed in order to use it? Why don’t you bundle all the dependencies with the download?
Closed as resolved
five years later
i found this through google search and it says it’s resolved but there’s no information what the problem was and all of the links don’t work anymore
Locked thread and restricted to contributors
link is actually experts exchange and you have to register just to see the answer
links to 11 year old thread for tangentially related Windows Vista problem, locks current thread
Why don’t you bundle all the dependencies with the download?
This is one reason I like statically compiled apps. You can just give users one executable and it’ll work. This is common with apps written in Go, but it’s doable (with some caveats) in C# now with AoT in .NET 8.
It ain’t called git-hub for nothing. The social network for gits. How else are they supposed to behave?
The medium internet user doesn’t even know what git is, so I think it is very likely that a lot of people don’t understand the way github works and are very upset by how “difficult” it can be to get an installer from it.
Git gud.
git: 'gud.' is not a git command. See 'git --help'.
You guys realize this was on a joke community, right? Most of the original comments missed it too…
Yes, I think that most of us realized from some of the self-aware wording that this is a parody. But like many parodies it’s a real trope taken to a silly extreme, so we’re talking about users who fit that trope (including ourselves, sometimes!).
Nah but the dude has a point
just go to the releases? yes it’s slightly hidden but that’s because github isn’t supposed to be a way to publish release files, it’s supposed to be a place to host and collaborate on source code.
but so long as the developer handles releases correctly it’s just like 2 clicks to download an executable file…
That’s just malicious compliance. They know they shouldn’t provide easy access because it may increase accountability. It’s silly
That’s the generation that doesn’t understand computers at all. FFS.
Theres a sweet spot before like 2010 where computer skills are still prevalent enough to be taught en masse, but the upcoming generation seem to be learning touchscreen keyboards and app stores long before they ever use a mouse or try to download off a website. The older generation has had time to adjust but a lot still struggle with tech.
Apparently UK universities need to teach how directories work to first year Computer Science students. They’ve grown up with polished, closed devices and many only know apps and the basics of using the internet.
Why do they feel so entitled for everything?
because they aren’t a smelly nerd ig
Of course this guy wants to use sherlock
I hadn’t heard of it, but it looks like it wouldn’t have much use outside of stalking or doxing.
Man these comments are fun. The patricians defending the (admittedly) bad UI/UX as the skill-hurdle it is, while the rest are finding inventive ways to rephrase “gib button plz”
The UI is fine.
It’s just that Github is a code sharing and collaboration platform for developers, not a software package distribution platform for end users.
While it may have begun that way (and may still be the overwhelming use case, idk the breakdown) devs are using it for FOSS releases, and that’s where the ‘less literate’ crowd enters. Sourceforge was very simple to use, and had a consistent layout. GitHub wasn’t meat to be a SF replacement, but here we are having this discussion
But it is often additionally used as a software package distribution platform, so it would be helpful for some developers to reach their users by having a clearer path to the most current release.
I can personally do without a special button, and the op is obviously making a joke, but why not improve the UX for some users? It’s certainly possible to do this without impacting the smelly nerds who wouldn’t use the button.
Plenty of developers also use GitHub for software distribution for end users, so that’s where the problems lie. I’m not saying GitHub should change their UI to match something the site wasn’t made for, but it’s still an issue for people who choose to use it that way.
Me when I have to do anything other than copy and paste build, or package manager, commands /s
pyinstaller and py2exe would’ve been helpful for this person
It’s more helpful if the developer configures a CI system to produce an executable. Stops people asking about how to do it.
Probably Tylenol as well
Ahahahah
Sometimes I can understand this struggle. For example let’s play a game. There is this app from e-foundation “Blisslauncher” it’s the default of eOS. And since I like it but don’t use eOS I want to download the apk from their gitlab page.
https://gitlab.e.foundation/e/os/BlissLauncher
So tell me, where is the latest release apk?
Is the only option to download build artifacts?
Yes, and they come in three variants, apiQ, apiS and apiR. And I don’t understand the difference.