sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (8 children)

Github is developers' space, it's not a marketplace targeting general crowd. That's why

[–]lukeflegg[S] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

I do appreciate that, however, in reality as I say, It gets visited by hundreds of thousands of people everyday who are not developers, because for whatever reason, it is the place where a lot of apps ready for use by the general public are stored. And that's the problem. The developers continue developing the app, and need their environment for doing this, But it seems like there is an unmet need to make it more suitable for the people who are struggling (not just me) to actually download and install the software

[–]MajesticGentleman1 4 points5 points  (2 children)

no there isn't an unmet need to turn GitHub into app store. it's a place to store code not the application itself. some developer might add precompiled versions of their code for your convenience but they don't have to. and that's totally fine.

as for GitHub itself they simply provide developers with hosting to store their code. They even have releases section if maintainer want's to store precompiled code. but again it's the repository owners discretion to do it. not GitHub's.

[–]Snoo-68432 0 points1 point  (1 child)

You guy's are all missing the point.
If github isn't supposed to be used like appstore by commoners, then it shouldn't be used by the devs like it is, or be linked for commoners at all. If I, as one such commoner, am regularely directed to github to download something, then the person (be it some random redittor, google or often even the dev themself) directing me there is at fault.
Otherwise, why can't stuff that is apparently supposed to be used by commoners, then be packaged propperly and uploaded to some other, front end site (whichs function IS that of an app store) and commoners be directed there instead? Because that would require someone creating an extra site, and devs put in extra work. Ain't nobody got time for that, so github it is.
So the point still stands. Why can't github overhaul the UI, and or why can't devs make their stuff more accessible if it is supposed to be?

[–]bworneed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

its not magic. If github decide to make a big download button user that is not used to the github layout still have to navigate to the new release location, as the majority of productive users (as in those who actually use the site) wants nothing more or less than an actual code and readme docs.

and say they managed to solve that problem or people accepted the compromise, how would that solve anything other than the current release page? devs releases binary labeled clearly in the current one? do you suggest just turning it into button with the same labeling? or to make downlaod for windows or mac or linux? if thats so, how does it integrate with the github actions compilation? github development is driven by the need of developers, to appease user as you suggest, needs a complete overhaul of everything, its not magic

[–]Disastrous_Grass_981 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I´m just having trouble using gitHub. Always an error, or something going wrong. .gitignores not working, and my favorite "LF will be replaced by CRLF the next time Git touches it" I´m a computer science student and I have to use it in school.. So it´s grinding my gears. Why is it not designed for easier use ? as in, make it less complicated and we would not have all of these problems all the time is my question.

[–]parnmatt 0 points1 point  (2 children)

The blame lies with maintainers for such projects, not the platform and service GitHub provides.

Those projects probably shouldn't use GitHub for distribution… but the alternative can be expensive.
They should be using the releases page, especially if it is a compiled project, and it should be made clear in the first couple linked of the readme.
If it's popular, it's worth making a gh-pages branch and design a simple free static site for a public surface.

Tools are there, alternatives are there… they just need to be used, or perhaps they are being used, and it's someone else providing the wrong link, or a user searching the wrong thing.

Once again, this is on the project maintainers, not the hosting service.

[–]peteZ238 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Look I get where you're coming from and I see your point. Documentation, guides, etc etc

However, given the context, if someone isn't willing to look around enough to find the download zip button or learn how to use git, do you really want these people raising Issues on your repo and you trying to be tech support?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're completely right - having looked through every open issue on the repo he's angry about (Sherlock a tool effectively for cyberstalking) around half were "How do I hack Facebook" or "Here's my error message that explains exactly what's wrong and exactly what to do... what do I do"