Let’s be honest, the majority here probably has a github account. Some of us are happy as a clam and wouldn’t switch no matter what happened, but there are some who would and haven’t yet. Why?
Elon Musk buying it.
Seriously though, it would take something rather drastic. Our company briefly tried using bitbucket, but it was just worse overall. Don’t touch a running system.
Elon Musk buying it.
Holy hell, you went for the jugular.
The guy owning the Xhub.com domain is rubbing his hands right now.
He shouldn’t be. Elon doesn’t give massive payouts. If he really wanted that domain, he’d trademark it and sue the owner for it.
He’ll rename branches tubes and merge conflicts X, and with that he’ll come up with the new name: xtube
My one-man software development company is using bitbucket along with a local mirror (with Gitea).
People also said that when Microsoft bought them. In the end it didn’t really make a dent in their user numbers
The problem is that you lose out on dev attention when moving away from github.
I moved my projects into github when placeholder projects literally containing a README with a link to the real repo only got way more interaction on github than in the real repository: More stars, more views, more issue reports and even more PRs (where the devs have obviously Cloned the repo from the actual repository but could not be arsed to push there as well).
If you want your project to be visible, it needs to be on github at this point in time:-(
Other hosters gaining more popularity, among other reasons, GitHub is owned by one of the worst companies around, I found Codeberg and switched there, now almost all of my projects live on Codeberg, mirrored to GitHub cause I don’t expect an employer would follow a link to Codeberg if I solely include it on my CV
Same. Shame though they may still probably have the audacity to use mirrors for non-consensual copilot training.
Lol. I read “Other oysters gaining more popularity”, and found it very appropriate !
I host my projects mostly on Codeberg but still keep a Github account because of the multitude of useful projects that are unfortunately hosted on GitHub. I wouldn’t waste a second to delete my GH account if those projects migrated to Codeberg or any other Libre alternatives.
Same. The biggest reason I’m still on github is because there’s no way to contribute to projects there without a user account.
Once federation gets added to one of the FOSS, self hosted alternatives, I’ll probably switch. I’ll mirror stuff to github probably, for resume/recruiter purposes, but the CI/CD, website deployment, and main development will happen on whatever alternative I chose.
It’s hard to overstate the psychology behind the github profile. As a developer, your github profile shows that you’re actively developing, whether it’s for open source projects or for work projects. My previously company used a private gitlab install, which meant only my open source work showed up on github. My current company uses github, which means my profile shows green all the time.
We’re a small company, but the github costs are a drop in the bucket. As others have said, it’d take something truly federated, or a crazy price jump from Github, for me to consider moving. It’s free for my open source projects, it’s a small amount for my company, and I have a public profile I can point to whenever I’m discussing my development.
Pretty much any deterioration of service would do it, I’m not tied to github at all, it works but so does gitlab and self hosted solutions.
All it took for me to switch to GitLab was a larger free lfs quota which I wanted for a project. The superior webpage UI made me migrate every old project to it too.
With free time and some rest I’d move to sourcehut.
What did GitHub do?[serious]
They’re just a monopoly and could easily pull a Unity, Twitter, Reddit, or whatever other big service exists.
It’s the implication
I made a similar post a while ago if you want to see some more answers - https://lemmy.ml/post/1990593
I already host my projects on my own gitea server so…
Same. I don’t use all the bells and whistles that others provide and gitea just works!
Do you collaborate with others? If so, how? And what do you use for CI(CD)?
I don’t collaborate with others on my private projects. But if I would, then I would just invite people to register themselves on my instance like they would on github, gitlab, bitbucket etc.
I have yet to deploy my pages via CI/CD but thats a project I want to do eventually :)
I’m not OP but I use Woodpecker CI, also self hosted. Gitea is also working on Gitea Actions which are supposed to be compatible with Github Actions, but I think it’s still on beta.
We run our own SourceHut instance because I hate all the social dopamine crap built into GH. I hate you need an account just to participate in a repo. I hate the heavy UI (sometimes it’s better than others).
Also, srht supports hg as well as git.
The only reason I don’t use srcht is its use of email for everything. It feels so last century.
This is what I love about it. Also email is used in the biggest projects in the world (including the linux kernel). It allows anyone to just clone & contribute immediately.
It’s archaic. The linux kernel has the amount of contributors using email because it literally is the only way to do so. The linux kernel can command its method of contribution because of its importance. If you start a new project and your only method of contribution is email, I bet you’ll miss out on most contributors. Same as if you limit real-time communication to IRC only (but at least there’s matrix for that).
Well there are many smaller projects than the kernel that still use the email workflow. To me it’s simple, not archaic. You’re right though, you definitely would miss out on contributors but that’s just the reality of the dev world today.
It may be simple in the sense of it being “lowtech”, but it certainly isn’t easy, IMO. I’d have to read a guide on how to send a patch or apply one from somebody else. Commenting on a line of code and following a discussion about it isn’t very legible. There’s no way to mark a discussion as resolved, now way to have a quick overview of the status of all the comments left on a patch, is it possible to submit a patch with multiple commits and if so how does one see the final result? Is it possible to sign my commits?
The UI and UX are need a lot of work, IMO.
I’d have to read a guide on how to send a patch or apply one from somebody else.
The guide is about 2 paragraphs and you’d also have to read a guide for how to create an account, fork, clone, push, send PR, etc. for the new normal workflow.
Commenting on a line of code and following a discussion about it isn’t very legible.
It’s normal email bottom posting usually, pretty simple to follow. The srht UI does a decent job of this for you as well imho.
There’s no way to mark a discussion as resolved, now way to have a quick overview of the status of all the comments left on a patch
In email specifically, no. Of course you can mark it resolved if using custom software (ie, srht) that supports it. Not sure what you mean of quick overview, unless you mean via a webpage which again, srht provides. If straight email, you have to cycle through the emails. Which for me, just means typing “j” or “k” instead of page up/down like you would on GH, srht, whatever.
is it possible to submit a patch with multiple commits and if so how does one see the final result?
Yes, of course. No clue about seeing them all in one final patch. I suppose that’s useful though I’ve never had an issue going through each patch individually. Maybe a feature suggestion for srht.
Is it possible to sign my commits?
I don’t see why not.
I’ve used email WF, then “github WF”, and found srht very refreshing when it launched. I still stuck with BitBucket because I didn’t want to take the time to move over but once they removed Mercurial support, we went all in with srht and no regrets. Our code review process via email is so much faster for us now and prior to this move, I was the only person on the team who’d worked with the email WF before.
Of course, I totally get it’s a personal preference and that a lot of younger developers have no experience with the email WF and humans are naturally resistant to change. They probably wouldn’t enjoy it either.
My own Git server.
If the social features become too egregious. It’s already turning into borderline LinkedIn with their new feed updates
Have you seen all the people just stuffing their profile README full of random graphics and stats and badges
I’ll admit I have a badge there myself to highlight the languages I work on. But some people are sure driving it beyond
I also think the addition of the achievement badges was a mistake, a coding platform doesn’t need this kind of gamification