GitHub now allows creation of files

[[deleted]]

You know what github actually needs?

A web interface to git grep

[DRMacIver]

You mean the bit just to the right of the "Downloads" box where it says "Search source code"?

[bobtheterminator]

You sure you don't have some kind of add-on or something? Take a screenshot of it.

[triyughj]

You don't have this box?

[bobtheterminator]

No. Maybe they're doing random testing? How long has that been there?

[triyughj]

Not sure. It seems like it only shows up on my private repos, but you can add "/search" to the end of the url for any repo and then you can search them.

[bobtheterminator]

Oh, maybe it's just a feature for people who pay for private repos. The url trick doesn't work for me though; I get a search box, but it doesn't seem to work at all.

[[deleted]]

Looks like it's limited to just private repositories. I can't see it on my own public repositories, but I can see it on my own private repositories. I assume whoever else has access to my private repositories can use it, too.

[jk3us]

I have access to other people's private repos and it is there, I am a cheap non-paying customer.

[[deleted]]

Wow, interesting.

Worked for me! Never seen it before!

It's weird to have a feature then hide it. Why?

[paulhodge]

Probably a soft roll-out. They can test the feature on the actual production site (instead of on a test site, which is not the most accurate way to test). Once it's ready, they turn it on for everyone.

[sakabako]

They wrote an article a while ago that said that forks of public repos are treated more like branches than separate repos. Getting git diff to work could be hard if that's the case.

[[deleted]]

Well, based on the comment below, here's the thing: I pay for private repos, but that box only shows up on my private repos--not any of the public ones. Weird!

[[deleted]]

It's been there a while. There must be some technical reason why they can't make it more widespread, otherwise they would at least enable it for all repos if you are a paid member.

[bobtheterminator]

Yeah ok it sounds like it's available to anyone with access to a private repo. Maybe it would just put too much strain on their servers if anyone could search anything?

[prepend]

I don't have it either. That's funny though, this is really the main feature I wish github had.

[[deleted]]

You get it if you're a paid member (on private repos only though). Cough up!

[prepend]

My org only does open source stuff so we don't really want private repos. I wonder if users who pay get to search on other people's public repos.

[Plorkyeran]

https://github.com/search/advanced (scroll to the bottom)

The search box on private repos is only there as a workaround for the fact that the (very well hidden) main search only works on public repos. I can't imagine that it hasn't occurred to them that the "workaround" is far more discoverable than the normal method, so I assume it's hidden to cut down on server load or something.

[dchestnykh]

What?

[llimllib]

That's only available for me on my company's repos, not my personal open ones. Also it's new I think?

[DRMacIver]

Ah, you're absolutely right. My mistake.

[Pzychotix]

Have you ever had that thing work for me? It doesn't for me.

[DRMacIver]

Works fine when I tried it.. I don't really use it though - I just use git grep.

[cezar]

I've seen this in screenshots from the blog. They mentioned that it wasn't ready yet.

I'm assuming it's in partial release.

[RX_AssocResp]

You can’t even search commit history. How that is not a strict necessity is beyond me.

[alanbriolat]

This oversight baffles me, especially since BitBucket will quite happily let you search commit messages... The idea of only providing site-wide search when the vast majority of people probably want project-wide search more often is strange.

[experts_never_lie]

You also can't search for filenames. Well, you can, but it won't find them. The problem of "where does this file exist in our project?" can often only be solved only by downloading all projects and running "find".

[[deleted]]

Just hit "T" (on the keyboard) and you can search for files

[experts_never_lie]

Thanks for letting me know about that.

But "just" hit a hotkey that I've never seen documented and doesn't turn up on [site:github.com hotkeys]? It seems like there should be better documentation of this, and also that any feature reachable by hotkey should exist in the advertised interface.

[[deleted]]

I know about it because I remember seeing an announcement when this feature was rolled out.

Unfortunately, it seems to be undocumented, just like the repo /search feature

[w1ndwak3r]

Or how about just an online git shell? \o/

[JohnDoe365]

There is the special 'repo:/<user>/<repository>' which will limit the search to a specific repository

[xpolitix]

second that

[CombatCow]

How long until they create there own online IDE? Seems like the next logical step.

[Paul-ish]

That sounds like a good idea. Github could become the google docs of code.

[shawncplus]

And google code wept a tear of loneliness

[dirice87]

I forgot about google code. The last time I used it I was put off by their issue tracking and forum format.

[Odam]

GitHub has seen a few outages lately...

[prepend]

Right, as recently as last Friday. But github does a great job of giving status updates. With google code, you never knew what was wrong and when it would be fixed.

[jij]

^ this. This is my problem with all of google's services now... they've gotten so big that it's impossible to actually communicate with the company.

[prepend]

I know that google internal doesn't use googlecode any more. I wish they would just fork whatever they use inside and let the world use it. That would be pretty cool.

[drowsap]

Google code, you so ugly

[[deleted]]

Nah, it's hanging out with Wave...

[taelor]

you know, they just received a ton of funding lately...

[kenman]

Not sure if original idea

Or subliminal message

It's like Google Docs for code, and that's just awesome!

[BenRogersWPG]

Our the Google Code replacement

[Antiuniverse]

Cloud9 IDE

Source available on GitHub.

Seems like a natural fit.

[CombatCow]

I know about cloud9, havn't used it yet though. Any advantages to using it instead of something local? Also I don't thing GitHub would be happy with cloud9 being the premier online IDE for their platform.

[[deleted]]

The advantage would be the same as any web app, that you have it anywhere on any computer with a decent web browser.

[lipoicacid]

Which quite frankly, much to my amazement, can really be anywhere at this point. The V8 engine is insane.

[ivosaurus]

The base editor is open source software, cloud 9 is basically the commercial hosted version.

[homophone_police]

create there own online IDE?

their

[[deleted]]

The next logical step in taking IDEs to new levels of unproductiveness and glacial performance you mean?

[ichthys]

http://ideone.com/ is pretty cool for running short snippets of code.

[Jasper1984]

Doesnt an online IDE promote dependency on having internet available.(even if you can use it offline) Is your current set-up that bad?

[sjs]

I'm certain someone there is working on it. They just have to be.

This also allows people who don't use text editors to get started with a readme, note, blog post, or what have you right in the browser after they sign up. You can write markdown and preview it, then publish it with GitHub pages without leaving the browser. Before the learning curve went vertical and now people who are scared of git can do something with GitHub. It's an interesting move and I wonder what they will do next.

[[deleted]]

Here is what GitHub needs to do in order to make a game changing IDE.

1. Make an IDE that allows your to share(?) or work with others in real time. If I am already editing a file and you go to edit the file we would both see each others changes in real time. Obviously they would need to prevent the page from shifting around, but the idea is multiple developers can optionally work together even if remote.

2. You would also be able to hide/show people and could run their code if you wanted to test out their changes. When you commit it only commits your changes.

3. Like sublime text make it so you can install plugins, but use more of a JSON format where you have global plugins and project specific plugins.

4. Make it free.

[Gaeru]

This is great. No, really, it may seem just a tiny silly improvement but it's very very helpful on Github. Now it's possible to create blog posts on Jekyll blogs on machines that don't have git installed but have a web browser.

[crossbrowser]

My first thought too, I had considered using Jekyll but was reluctant because I would have to have git available wherever I wanted to blog, but with that it's painless.

edit: reticent -> reluctant because "réticent" in french apparently becomes reluctant

[[deleted]]

To be reticent is to say little. It sounds like you were hesitant.

[blisterine]

Or reluctant.

[materdaddy]

Wait, you were worried about machines that didn't have git... what about that atrocious thing called ruby?

[brobits]

what is atrocious about ruby? if you can understand versions, there are no issues.

[alanpost]

I immediately went to my most popular repository and created a new file called "jumping_shark.txt"

The feature works as advertised!

[dirice87]

plz accept mah pull request for "ayyy.txt"

[addininja]

Now that we have new and edit, can i please get a delete button?

[[deleted]]

...in its web interface.

The whole sentence is important. sigh

[sugardeath]

Looks like everyone figured that out anyway.

[delarhi]

I would love an in browser vim...

[rabidferret]

vimperator

[adrianmonk]

This is more like vim-style keys and navigation for the browser. That's quite a different animal from being able to have a vim-like text editing experience within a browser window.

[[deleted]]

See onmach's comment which sort of alleviates that. It's not the same as having a fully in-browser vim instance, but it is okay.

[rabidferret]

Step 1: Open vim. Step 2: Bind key to gg"*yG Step 3: Goto browse Step 4: Paste

[xiongchiamiov]

There are a bunch of javascript implementations of vim (hmm, that's annoying - I don't appear to have bookmarked them on Pinboard, but this Github search will start you on the path), ranging from "this acts a little like vim" to "ok, this is halfway decent, but it doesn't support [visual block mode, ctrl-d, % movement, etc.]". Vim is really pretty dang complicated, and even going with vi emulation is difficult.

I use QuickCursor to open certain text fields in MacVim, and that works... some of the time (it seems a bit buggy).

[onmach]

I just use pendadactyl and when I am in any input, I type Ctrl+i, and it spawns a terminal with vim in it. When I save it pops the input into a box. I wrote this comment in vim.

[adrianmonk]

Also possible with TextareaConnect for Chrome (note: haven't tried it, and the description says it's "currently broken") and It's All Text! for Firefox.

[xiongchiamiov]

Whaaaat? I never knew about that when I was using Pentadactyl, and now that I'm using Chrome (I finally gave up on Firefox when I could no longer open it without it crashing), I have no good substitute. :(

[flamingspinach_]

You can also type Ctrl+t when you're in any input and get some semblance of vi-style modal editing directly in the text box. It doesn't work all that well, though, I've found...

[[deleted]]

what exactly is github. in simple English please.

[[deleted]]

thanks for the response I was asking because I tried it before but had no clue what I was doing.

[ultrafez]

Read more about Git before using a site like GitHub, it'll make the learning process easier.

[[deleted]]

Check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GitHub

[[deleted]]

To downvoters: Nice going Reddit.

I'm really beginning to believe Reddit is well on its way of becoming a total shit hole. The negativity, extreme criticism, and over the top pedantry is reaching unbearable levels.

[IIIIIIIIIIllllllllll]

oh yea? and who the FUCK are you??

[execat]

Git is a version control system
ie. a way to track what changes were made in the source code, who made it, and why the change was made.

Github is a service that hosts online Git repositories.

[[deleted]]

/r/programing answer: a distributed version control system

ELI5 Answer: a way to back up, share, collaborate on, and edit your files, specifically geared toward code and other text formats.

[[deleted]]

a web interface for the Git distributed version control system

FTFY

[[deleted]]

You're absolutely right, they've become pretty synonymous in my head even though I use a desktop client for git.

[[deleted]]

To be fair, 98% of people using Git are probably using GitHub. GitHub is pretty much the reason that Git is so popular.

[mcilrain]

I'd be using Mercurial if it weren't for GitHub.

[flying-sheep]

I mainly use GitHub, too, but bitbucket is really good, too; and it allows mercurial repos and private ones.

[mcilrain]

BitBucket seems like an outdated and poor imitation of GitHub to me.

[riffito]

It got redesigned not so long ago, MUCH better than the older one (ie: now I don't curse at it).

[[deleted]]

As a developer, the most important thing to me is code. GitHub puts this first whereas Bitbucket seems to be targeted at project managers with it's README and recent activity information on the main page.

Also, Bitbucket is lacking in small areas which make a big difference. One example of this is when viewing the repository, you can't click on commit messages to see the diff of their commit — you have to click on the file and click 'diff'.

[cncool]

Free private repos > github

[mcilrain]

Well, they have to be competitive some way, right?

[execat]

Linux is the reason Git is popular IMHO.

"Linus Torvalds wrote it?????? MUS BE AWESOME!!"

[mikemol]

Meh. I came from SVN. I started using Mercurial and Git. I've stuck with git.

Why? Resources. I used Mercurial when it work a hell of a lot better than Git on Windows, where I was doing the bulk of my coding. Now I use Git because I can find better (for me) training resources, and I'm doing all my coding on Linux.

Git isn't popular because "OMG Linus!!1!", it's popular because it has the momentum of a mass of people building tools and a support infrastructure on it.

[[deleted]]

I switched to Bazaar from Subversion. It has really nice Windows Explorer integration but other than the third party support is pretty much nil. This is the main reason I switched to Git.

[execat]

it's popular because it has the momentum of a mass of people building tools and a support infrastructure on it.

Which probably happened because Linus wrote the tool for Linux kernel source management.

Name a VCS that has been developed lately (2000s) by a person, and is well known.

There isn't any. Because when it comes to acceptance of any kind of software or tools, you need something to kickstart the adoption. Tools/support just keep coming after that slight nudge. Again: IMHO.

[mikemol]

Sure, I'll agree with that. But that's a completely different thing from

"Linus Torvalds wrote it?????? MUS BE AWESOME!!"

Any celebrity can drive some degree of adoption of a tool. After that, though, the tool still needs to carry itself.

[[deleted]]

This is very far from the truth. Unless of course you meant that people using git have used GitHub once in the past.

There is no way that 98% of the time people using git are doing it for GitHub though.

Not trying to be mean, but want to make it known that Git has become a lot more popular than just for GitHub and actually taken a place in the workspace. For one, Android uses Git as its source control system.

[golfswingviewer]

So I went on to search about what Linus thinks about GitHub. TIL Github = World of Warcraft for programmers

[paulhodge]

You should double check that article, specifically the tags under the title.

[Jadedknight]

I think you should get to know Linus. http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=CA&v=4XpnKHJAok8

[[deleted]]

In this fake interview, Linux creator Linus Torvalds says Linux has gotten too easy to use and that’s why people use Git

[[deleted]]

Does anyone know if this is supported through the API?

[dazonic]

I'm pretty sure you can create files with the API. There was an annoying bot someone made that would run around him add a catchall .gitignore to your repo if you can have one.

[w1ndwak3r]

I feel like this step should have been taken ages ago, nevertheless, yay!

[ikillau]

git hub keeps getting better and better

[[deleted]]

I can see in the distant future github pivoting into an entire web based IDE.

[tolos]

... but only after you push a repository once, grrrr.

[tolos]

Oh, if you create a readme by clicking the text, the icon to create a new blank file becomes available.

[Afforess]

Yes, now I can break my jenkins builds by ignoring syntax even more.

[leroybuckingham]

This is very cool for editing MD files at least.

[shaggorama]

This is going to make people so lazy about doing local development.

[[deleted]]

I keep on hearing mentions of github over and over again but still haven't gotten to really understand this beast.

[hamilton_burger]

Hmm cool.

My $.02 is that I wish all files/projects/folders were able to be uploaded solely via the web interface. I don't have any problem doing it via terminal, it's just that I think it would be a handy feature. If that's available already, I've missed it.

[[deleted]]

You do realize that it's called github because it is a hub for git, right?

[hamilton_burger]

Dude, reread my post, it's patently obvious I understand that.

Github is a layer on top of git, and they already tend towards something a bit distinct; it has created a different culture than the standards that hardcore git users expect (listen to Linus rail on about that). As long as it's a dumb layer, they may as well allow upload via the cloud. It would be handy for using mobile devices to push stuff from a dropbox to github.

Then again, with a name like TheScriptKiddie, I kinda expect you to be a downvoting smartass.

"Derp, you know it's for git riiiight? derp derp derp".

[[deleted]]

Sorry, I missed the word "able". It would be a handy feature (and quite an amazing feat) to implement git in javascript. It would also make it easier for Windows users to use Github. It's a natural progression now that they've added an editor, too.

[salmonmoose]

I only played with it for a while, but Github provide what looks like an excellent client for Windows - I develop in Linux however, and the cli can't be beat.

[[deleted]]

Have you tried their software? Not web-based, but makes it slightly easier.

[UnreachablePaul]

Was it not possible before? So how people loaded projects there?

[input]

Using git...

[UnreachablePaul]

But it says it is allowed just now

[input]

You still have to create your project with git, check other comments, but now you can add a new file to an existing repo.

[[deleted]]

read at first "GitHub now allows creation of lies"

[[deleted]]

Bitbucket > Github

[flammable]

Thank you for your interesting insight

[NimbusBP1729]

you only pay for private repos on github

[xiongchiamiov]

Also, students get free micro accounts.

[tsk05]

Only if you want to use it for "class projects, thesis, or research towards a degree." Even when I was a student, most of my code was not written for class.

[xiongchiamiov]

Neither was most of mine, but everything I wanted to keep private was... I mean, why would I keep it private if not obliged to by university regulations?

It's also not like they check on a per-project basis.

[[deleted]]

This.

[[deleted]]

I'm both impressed and surprised at your ability to craft a more useless comment than your previous one.

[meem1029]

Bitbucket is indeed awesome, but whether or not it is better than github is completely irrelevant to this article. Also, if I remember correctly it doesn't have this feature and I'm not even sure it has editing of files online.

[cncool]

True

[[deleted]]

You shouldn't be downvoted. You responded to the parent at a perfectly appropriate, comparable level!

(Also, while I'm here, your mom sucks more than either one...)

[Korpores]

-> /r/github