• floofloof@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    The corporate branding, the new “AI-powered developer platform” slogan, makes it clear that what I think of as “GitHub”—the traditional website, what are to me the core features—simply isn’t Microsoft’s priority at this point in time.

    Microsoft software is all like this: the features users want and would find most useful are never a priority, nor are the bugs that annoy existing users. The priority is whatever some unholy alliance of management and marketing have pulled out of their corporate bottoms as the focus of this month’s promotion. It doesn’t seem even to be about what would drive sales, since customers like things that work. It’s some logic that only makes sense to the businesspeople who speak that absolutely vapid buzzword slurry that gushes from Satya Nadella’s mouth. I don’t get it, but it’s very consistent with Microsoft.

    • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      They want to make stuff that look good in the quarterly earnings report. They want to show they’re fully committed to AI in all their products or whatever.

      They don’t want satisfied customers. They want satisfied investors.

    • intrepid@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The same thing happens at Amazon. First they screwed up the product search by treating the user’s query as a suggestion rather than as a requirement. Now reports are coming out saying that the search bar has been replaced by an AI prompt with very badly summarized and often wrong results.

  • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Give a hacker a github, they’ll commit for a week.

    Give a hacker a mailing list and an ssh, and they’ll be selfhosting for the rest of their life.

  • intrepid@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t know what’s happening at github, but even the tree page rendering is annoyingly slow now. I wish they stopped ruining a working product by bloating it up with unnecessary ‘features’.

    • Contravariant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s kind of neat you can launch a version of Visual Studio code by pressing ‘.’ though.

      Still not sure why, especially given that it’s pretty much impossible to find out that you can even do that.

      • intrepid@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I can understand why it excites you. But I’m old enough to recognize that if you cede control of your offline tools like IDE to them, they will eventually exploit it to make money by ruining your day. I’m perfectly happy sacrificing a bit of convenience to protect myself against rent seeking in the future.

        Honestly in this day and age where everything runs inside containers, you should be able to do that in your home server. Distrobox proves it. Even a good alternative to vscode exists - theia by eclipse - that’s designed to do exactly this.

      • gomp@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah… does git have issue tracking? actions? C’mon: it’s not like github & co. are just git.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Again, like OP said, those are typically distinct functionality: issue tracking, source control, deployment etc. GitHub bringing everything into one platform is atypical and obviously done for the goal of centralization. The more stuff you add to a platform the harder it makes it to leave or replicate.

          But no, technically speaking you don’t need to have all of it in one place. There’s no reason for which you must manage everything together.

          I don’t even understand why people like GitHub so much, its source management sucks. The fact it still doesn’t have a decent history visualization to this day is mind-boggling.

          Look for ways to do things separately and you will find much better tools. GitHub’s “one size fits all” approach is terrible and only holds because people are too lazy to look for any alternative.

          • gomp@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I don’t even understand why people like GitHub so much, its source management sucks.

            It’s not that complicated… people use it because everyone has an account there and so your project gets more visibility (and your profile too, for those who plan to flex it when they look for the next job) and more contributions. Even a lot of projects that aren’t on github have some sort of mirror there for visibility.

            Suppose you wanna contribute to gnu grep (or whatever)… do you happen to know off the top of your head where the source repo and bug tracker are? And do you know what’s the procedure to submit your patch?

            If you are a company doing closed source, I agree that I don’t see why you would choose github over the myriad alternatives (including the self hosted ones).

            Look for ways to do things separately and you will find much better tools

            That’s a great way to spend your resources developing yet-another-source-forge-thingie instead of whatever your actual project/product is supposed to be :)

            • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              But you don’t have to develop anything. There are plenty of ready-made excellent tools you can just drop-in. The main fallacy is that what Github does is actually useful, or that the pieces it integrates are useful. 90% of Github is subpar for any given purpose. Consider all the possible types of software being developed and all the different release flows and support/issue flows, how could they possibly be shoehorned into a one-size-fits-all? Yet people try their damnest to do exactly that.

              To do software development you need (A) issue tracking, (B) a clear release flow, and © a deploy mechanism that’s easy to use. A is a drop-in tool with lots of alternatives, B is unrestricted since Git is very flexible in this regard, and C is typically included with any cloud infrastructure, unless you’re doing on premise in which case there are also drop-in tools.

              A, B, C are three distinct, orthogonal topics that can and should be handled separately. There’s no logical reason to shape any of them after the other. They have to work together, sure, but the design considerations of one must not affect the others.

              • gomp@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                But you don’t have to develop anything.

                I interpreted your “look for ways to do things separately” as “look for separate tools that do the various things” (and you have to integrate), but I see now that you meant “look for ways to do things differently”. My bad.

                • nik9000@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I used gerrit and zuul a while back at a place that really didn’t want to use GitHub. It worked pretty well but it took a lot of care and maintenance to keep it all ticking along for a bunch of us.

                  It has a few features I loved that GitHub took years to catch up to. Not sure there’s a moral to this story.

        • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’m glad I get to introduce you to it! The biggest instance is Codeberg. Fediverse integration isn’t there yet but the general consensus is its coming very soon since that’s Codeberg’s main focus for the forgejo project right now

      • delirious_owl@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        They’re asking for a federated forge, not decentralized VCS.

        I should be able to log into my own instance and use that account to open a bug report with your project, for example.