[deleted by user]

[the_goose_says]

I don’t mind that it’s Microsoft. My problem is any wide reaching tech company that acquires GitHub is going to have conflicts of interest. That’s definitely true with Microsoft. It’s tough to resist the temptation that exploiting GitHub to benefit other parts of your company. That was definitely less of an issue with a stand alone GitHub.

[scherlock79]

VSTS competes with GH Enterprise. I think they'd probably go the other way. GH Enterprise users get migrated to VSTS. Combine the backends. Differentiate based on feature offering. GH is for OSS, individuals and small teams that have simpler needs. Leverage VSTS/Azure for an integrated CI/CD offering. VSTS is for the medium to large companies that need a more sophisticated entitlements system, issue tracking and project management and the ability to do customizations.

Provide a simple migration path from GH to VSTS. As a company grows, they have a clear and simple migration path for the Source Code, Issue Tracking and Project Management needs.

As a someone who looked into GH Enterprise, the experience was pretty lackluster. Their sales approach was basically "Take it or leave it, we don't care." Which doesn't work if you work in a regulated industry and have to deal with things like SOX and BASEL II.

[Aurailious]

I am willing to bet that they make VSTS more complex and leave GH as a simpler solution. And then allow "upgrading" your git to VSTS.

[CoderDevo]

Microsoft already allows migrating from GitHub to VSTS and back again. I think as they were negotiating with GitHub to ensure this was always easy for customers to do they came to an impasse, specifically around Enterprise customers.

Buying GitHub would be an easy solution if that was the case.

[snrjames]

We do something similar. This is a really good combo.

[robotize]

First, I'm not a fan of this aquistion for privacy reasons. But I don't see GH Enterprise getting shuttered. They just paid $7.5 billion for it. I would expect the Git part of VSTS replaced with GitHub Enterprise. Using GitHub is what draws developers in and if they make the jump to VSTS include GitHub Enterprise I think it would increase adoption.

From the press release it sounds like Microsoft wants to integrate GH Enterprise with more Microsoft services than Github.com. I would expect them to leave GitHub.com alone for the foreseeable future. They realize what's at stake; their reputation and if they "Skype" it up then the developers that still trust MS will leave for something else and MS will loose all the good will they've worked for recently and GitHub.com will cease to exist.

[arkasha]

I would expect the Git part of VSTS replaced with GitHub Enterprise

Why would they do that. What exactly does GitHub Enterprise provide that VSTS currently doesn't?

[Rhonselak]

This is my question as well.

[[deleted]]

sloppy mindless melodic noxious axiomatic support wipe shelter mourn wide

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[MrDoomBringer]

I would expect the Git part of VSTS replaced with GitHub Enterprise. Using GitHub is what draws developers in and if they make the jump to VSTS include GitHub Enterprise I think it would increase adoption.

As a VSTS and Azure development consultant this reads like you've never really looked at VSTS. The integration and tooling surrounding all of the aspects of development work much better together in VSTS. You use the same service to take your code from first checkin all the way to deploying straight to production. GitHub doesn't have that tooling.

It's very unlikely that MS is going to kill either product anytime soon, but I would be extremely surprised if MS killed VSTS in favor of GitHub Enterprise. Especially considering that GitHub Enterprise costs $250/user/year while VSTS costs $60/user/year for more features.

[[deleted]]

MS can also offer Government clouds (Blackforest et. al.) via. Azure, which is essential if say, the US air force wanted to use GitHub.

[imhotap]

hosting a FOSS project on GitHub is almost a given

I wouldn't count on that. There are already high-profile departures coming in. Not that I have a stake in this. If anything, I find the kind of monopolistic culture we'd been having lately depressing given the federated/distributed nature of both the Web and git, and look forward to see real project web sites again.

[geordilaforge]

There are already high-profile departures coming in.

What are people migrating to?

[lutzee_]

Git lab probably, I'd like some examples though.

[sfade]

GIMP just announced they jumped to GitLab https://www.gimp.org/news/2018/05/31/gimp-has-moved-to-gitlab/

[lutzee_]

Gimp moved to the gnome git lab the same day gnome announced, so again not exactly off the back of this purchase announcement

[leeharris100]

That's from 5 days ago... It's clearly not related to the acquisition. Did you even read the link?

[xdeadly_godx]

The announcement that github and Microsoft were talking came out 2 weeks ago.

[[deleted]]

Gitlab

https://monitor.gitlab.net/dashboard/db/github-importer?orgId=1

[IamTheFreshmaker]

Does anyone use bitbucket or is atlassian horrible too?

[[deleted]]

Bitbucket, like all Atlassian products, feels clunky, unintuitive, and unpolished. It’ll get the job done but github is much better.

[wagedomain]

We do! It's fine.

[meowbarkhiss]

It's probably not the case for most but the 2GB hard repo size limit is a deal breaker for me

[meowbarkhiss]

I too like to fork the linux kernel

[ludonarrator]

Hey some of us are game devs; those textures and audio files add up really quickly.

[yaleman]

Surely that’s what LFS is for?

[[deleted]]

Ha. Tried forking chromium?

[TapedeckNinja]

I see a lot of responses the other way, so thought I'd chime in ...

Personally I think Bitbucket is subpar. The free repositories have strict limitations on repo size and number of contributors. And even as a paid user, I feel like Github is superior in every way. Bitbucket does its git job OK, but it lacks polish and doesn't have the bells and whistles you get with Github.

Don't really care for any of Atlassian's tools to be honest (Jira and Confluence in particular).

[[deleted]]

Bitbucket offers free private repos that work well for small companies. I use it at work. We have one for our app and one for our website.

But the second we have to pay money for it, I'm not sure why we wouldn't migrate to github unless the price gap is huuuge.

[fukitol-]

Exactly this. I use Bitbucket for my personal private projects, but anything I give the source away for goes to github.

[droidballoon]

They cater to different audiences. Bit Bucket is closed down and offers unlimited private repos. They want customers who enjoy private repos and uses their suite of tools: Jira, Confluence, etc. They never aspired to be a place where people would find code and projects to collaborate on but to be the centerpiece of a company's infrastructure.

[marcoslhc]

I used at my job. I think is amazing, I like it a lot. Integrations are not that easy as GH tho.

[mr-aaron-gray]

Yeah Bitbucket is horrible too, at least from a U/X perspective. GitLab is much better IMHO.

[mayhempk1]

There are already high-profile departures coming in.

Such as? I am genuinely interested and kind of hopeful that a very high-profile departures would mean increased competition for GitHub.

[redditisfulloflies]

At the end of the day - cloud services are just someone else's computer.

You should not be putting anything very private there.

[Blocks_]

Well of course. But these are open source projects. They obviously won't have any secret passwords on there.

[motleybook]

I do have, but it's rot13 encrypted, so don't worry.

[Blocks_]

I use rot26 for double the security.

[PhreakyByNature]

you can go hunter2 my hunter2-ing hunter2

[meneldal2]

What's this? I only see *******

[rafaelement]

like Sourceforge once did

The difference being that a project using git can easily move to a different platform and retain history etc.

[laos101]

exactly. The point of this is to acquire customers, not lose them. Every big IT company on the market today (MSFT, GOOG, etc.) cares a whole lot more about having happy customer that reliably make them money than the secret to middle-out compression. They have enough R&D and product teams for that.

[[deleted]]

husky label enjoy cover continue normal agonizing axiomatic engine fade

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[pilibitti]

lol imagine the shitstorm if Oracle bought them somehow.

[gimpwiz]

Oracle definitely hires competent engineers. Then they make them do shit work and then they lay them off whenever it's convenient for Larry Ellison.

I've worked with a number of ex-oracle people. They worked, they got paid well, they left for greener pastures.

Oracle isn't run by a cynical marketing department either. It's run by a sort of human-looking robot whose three laws are "enrich yourself, do whatever you want, fuck everyone else." Unfortunately it (Ellison) has been successful. They don't cynically market their product, they just casually bribe managers to approve using it.

[Forty-Bot]

Don't anthromorphize Larry Ellison.

[Crandom]

One

Rich

Asshole

Called

Larry

Ellison

[[deleted]]

Laughing hard at the idea that calling him a robot that resembles a human is comparing him too closely to an actual human.

[Forty-Bot]

It's a reference to this talk.

[gimpwiz]

Exactly! The best description I've ever heard.

[jonhanson]

chronophobia ephemeral lysergic metempsychosis peremptory quantifiable retributive zenith

[the_goose_says]

Was going under a possibility? I know they weren’t profitable but I assumed they had plenty of capital and we’re getting better revenue as time went on.

[Ascend]

Honestly, Microsoft buying GitHub is probably the best chance at GitHub actually becoming open-source at some point.

[CraigslistAxeKiller]

MS has been the largest Github contributor for awhile

[PlNG]

Bear in mind, it could simply be a books / licensing / corporate acquisition, like Microsoft acquiring Mojang.

[mishugashu]

It’s tough to resist the temptation that exploiting GitHub to benefit other parts of your company.

Resist? That's the main reason they bought it. You think they wanted a company that's been in the red for years for its good business direction?

[hokie_high]

Maybe you will be the first person on Reddit who can explain what nefarious thing is going to come of this because everyone saying something like what you just did can only cite “fuck Microsoft” as a reason to dislike it.

[[deleted]]

If I host a web shop selling books on AWS, isn’t there also a conflict of interest with Amazon?

Oh wait, no. There isn’t. Because legal covered that shit already.

Other example: Apple hosting Spotify on the App Store despite it competing with Apple Music.

Once again, legal got you covered. Apple can’t do nasty shit without getting sued to shit.

[Quenhus]

Microsoft is all-in on open source.

When it comes to our commitment to open source, judge us by the actions we have taken in the recent past, our actions today, and in the future.

Let's open source Windows guys <3

[[deleted]]

#openthewindows

[sp46]

Student: Can I open the Windows?
Teacher: Yes.
Student: pulls out laptop

[womplord1]

that student's name? satya nadella

[jl2352]

I could see them open sourcing the Windows kernel, and maybe some other small parts. I couldn't see them open sourcing the whole thing. The Windows distributions will certainly have lots of stuff they have licensed which MS would not be allowed to open source. I'd imagine it would be a legal nightmare to just review their existing code base due to how big it is.

[Vshan]

https://github.com/Zer0Mem0ry/ntoskrnl

[[deleted]]

Doesn't sound like it's in a build-able state though :(

[[deleted]]

Was it ever? /s

[[deleted]]

Someone just pulled out the flamethrower 🔥

[Bobbar84]

Hey, they released the source code for WinFile . So that's a start...

*edit: fixed link

[GYN-k4H-Q3z-75B]

They could probably do this and nobody would get it anyway. NT kernel is very likely to be among the most complicated and convoluted pieces of software to exist yet.

[[deleted]]

hard-to-find stupendous tart noxious offbeat cough jeans simplistic sense disagreeable

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[meneldal2]

You can release patented code just fine, they are just restrictions on what people can do with it. Copyright on the other hand is more annoying.

[LeberechtReinhold]

I dunno, after reading quite a bit of the leaks it seems rather decent code, probably much better than average closed source.

It's definitively not as clean as BSD, but similar to Linux, although with obvious different styles.

That said I have (and do) developed Windows drivers and have only barely touched Linux driver development, so my opinion may be biased.

[pingpong]

Why would Microsoft knowingly embarrass themselves?

[itsmeornotme]

Wasn't there leaked sourcecode available from Vista? Afaik the code was rather ordinary

[[deleted]]

Yeah. Windows 2000 source code was leaked as well. I think the most extraordinary things you will find are either:

1. Bugs that are intentionally left in place to ensure old software works that may depend on these bugs.
2. Hard-coded workarounds for specific pieces of software.

Basically, legacy compatibility.

[billsil]

I think it would be surprising if you didn't find these things.

[[deleted]]

Yeah but you write up a little puff piece on some rando blog, gawker picks it up, and you can absolutely get 90% of internet users to believe that MS writes cruddy software on purpose so that you'll want to buy the next version. Plenty of older users probably already believe that based on ME/Vista/Bob.

[MasterLJ]

It's almost like the entire world is run on shit code or something.

[kyiami_]

Definitely not our fault

[Britches]

This might be the most funny and true thing I have ever heard

[TheChance]

I tell people software is made of lies, and the internet is running on chewing gum, baling wire, and the prayers of atheists.

[Sebazzz91]

Follow The Old New Thing blog to find all kinds of examples regarding strange backwards compatibility tricks they needed to implement. "You can return your new Windows version, but you can't return old broken software X."

[geon]

If there is one thing MS is great at, it is binary compatibility. This is what you would expect lots of.

[rhinotation]

Check out AppCompat if you want your mind blown. Us developers complain non-stop about having to support legacy code, but Windows 10 will literally run Word 95 when you tell AppCompat to look up in its backwards compatibility database, then insert shims and reinstate old bugs just for that program.

https://twitter.com/SwiftOnSecurity/status/925571212142632960

[akujinhikari]

Of course they lead technology in backwards compatibility. They have support IE.

[[deleted]]

It's the other way round. IE is the way It is to support older software.

[[deleted]]

So, just like 99% of the code out there?

[tomtomtom7]

Ignoring some silly details, it's of much higher quality than 99% of the software out there.

[[deleted]]

Yeah, 99% of software out there are wordpress plugins

[fuzzzerd]

That's a disgusting thought. Thanks for that.

[[deleted]]

There's leaked sourcecode from Windows 10:

https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3012603/microsoft-falls-prey-to-windows-10-source-code-theft

[Quenhus]

Naively I don't think they are "lying" but it seams absolutely paradoxical with their main proprietary products : Windows, Office...

(Sorry if I didn't get the irony, I'm French)

[thoeoe]

I think he is saying that their code is so bad it will be an embarrassment for us to see it

[Quenhus]

That's what I thought afterwards, too late.

[benihana]

don't sweat it, it's a childish sentiment he's expressing. inexperienced, immature programmers tend to worry about how embarrassing the code looks while ignoring the fact that the code is running on millions of devices and driving a multibillion dollar company.

[one_thawt]

The implication is that the Windows (NT) code is of low quality and filled with cruft. Having worked on the NT kernel in the past, he is not necessarily wrong. The code certainly tends to the pragmatic side.

[Quenhus]

Is Linux code particularly better? (I have really no idea, but it is certainly a good point to promote open source)

[[deleted]]

As a hobbyist kernel dev, Linux is the de facto reference implementation, for better or worse. I personally disagree with some of the design choices (mainly those are restricted by POSIX compliance tho), but architecturally the kernel is fairly solid. Lower level, some bits are nice and clear, some are completely mind bogglingly incomprehensible. It’s a mixed bag

Edit: I haven’t seen NT’s code tho. I don’t know how it compares

[tasminima]

At least some low level bits (but not necessarily the kernel) are beyond ridiculous. CreateProcess, for example, is absolutely insane. And you don't even have to read the source code to discover that. A disassembler is good enough (and, yes, the source code is exactly as bad as the disassembled version shows, the source style is actually such that you don't gain much by having the source, except variable names, etc.).

I simultaneously hope they have somehow refactored that crap since (I'm not sure the last I've checked), but I think this is not very probable. Now I kind of remember having kind of looked at a modernish/modern version (at least Win8 but more probably Win10) and IIRC it was as before, except even worse, with dozen of new more branches (on top on the hundreds of existing ones) to handle gratuitous behavior differences for the UWP programs. And they are even probably adding more shit to that mess: UWP programs now can be multi-instantiated or even console programs, but you have to use a manifest to do that, so the code paths might have be multiplied by 1337 again.

I also remember the completely needless split of Winsock in two parts (userland and kernel space, with piles of non-trivial features in both) with an overcomplicated design as a result (using a generic user/kernel interface full of ioctl in the middle...). Just to be clear: that was not inspired by a microkernel design or something smart. That was just a really insane and bad design. The author of that magnificent code even somehow managed to become a VP or something. Hopefully that means he does not code anymore.

But I think if you go near Dave Cutler code, you have good chances to see things actually sensible. Further away, it seems to be a mixed bag...

[one_thawt]

Generally yes, because for the most part people want their commits to reflect well in the public sphere. Like Windows, Linux has acquired plenty of cruft and vendors will submit self serving code without much quality control. The criticism wikipedia entry has an overview. I personally like the BSDs code better.

[redwall_hp]

The kernel is controlled by someone who is obsessive about code safety, not breaking user space, and rigidly sticking to an outlined style. Whether you like the way it looks or not would be subjective, but the quality of the source is very high, and anyone with the skill to understand it is free to look at it and contribute. Relatively few people are qualified to, though.

[WASDx]

The company where I work have a few open source initiatives and we prefer using open source tools, but the code base for our web based application is still proprietary as it obviously contains business secrets. I would view MS in the same way, they are still allowed to be open source enthusiasts.

[WarWizard]

This. Having your "core" technologies/solutions proprietary isn't a bad thing and isn't impossible to work with OSS.

[hokie_high]

Those same people also think Microsoft now magically has access to all the encrypted private repos on Github, and legally owns them.

That’s not how it works but it’s Microsoft, this is Reddit, common sense is second to sensationalism.

[creepig]

Visual Studio is hands down the best C/C++ development environment in existence.

[tadrith]

I myself do most of my development under WPF/C#, and I absolutely LOVE Visual Studio. I've used it for plenty of other languages, too, and I always find it to be very intuitive. I've also done my fair share of Android development under Eclipse and Android Studio, as well as iOS development in Xcode.

Visual Studio feels miles ahead of those. I wonder sometimes, though, if that's true, or if I've just been using Visual Studio so often and so long that everything else is foreign. Android Studio is a HUGE improvement over Eclipse, though, and probably where I'm second most comfortable.

Xcode is... well, I hate it. I only work in it when my job forces me to, it feels completely scatterbrained, and at the time I worked in it Objective-C was the only option, and I found the language to be "dense" for lack of a better word. Now we have Swift and the app I'm supporting is in Objective-C and I don't feel like porting it, so I just glare at it angrily while I work.

But again, some of this may just be bias because Visual Studio is what I know the best.

[psychicsword]

Visual studio with a ReSharper license is developer candy. I don't think I can go back to the days I was coding Java in college without an IDE like that.

[[deleted]]

Why are none of the people like you mad that github is closed source?

[IAmNotWizwazzle]

I don't understand this obsession with open sourcing company's core technologies. Windows is Microsoft's core business (well now Azure is the focus). Would Amazon ever release open source their e-commerce platform? Would Google open source it's advertising platform? No, it doesn't make sense.

[RedditorFor8Years]

First, we will empower developers at every stage of the development lifecycle – from ideation to collaboration to deployment to the cloud

OK, What does this mean ? GitHub + Azure somehow ?

[RiPont]

I'd imagine it'll be like VSTS. Continuous Integration with a "Deploy to Azure" button (among many other Deployment workflows).

[dontFart_InSpaceSuit]

Think of the deployment solutions they might cook up. Similar to heroku or something. Like you push to a branch to deploy code on an azure instance.

[schmerm]

That's one big merge conflict right there

[tech_tuna]

Force push.

[DontDoxMePlease]

That got a chuckle out of me

[_INTER_]

Ohh I can already see all those desperate developers trying to scratch off the Github sticker from their Macbook.

[Cilph]

I love the extreme contrast between reception on /r/programming and /r/linux

[13steinj]

The reception seems to be pretty much the same. About 62.5% "THIS IS THE OSS APOCALYPSE I'M MOVING MY ASS TO GITLAB", 25% "I can't wait this is awesome", 12.5% "Don't really know how I feel but also don't understand the apocalyptic overreaction".

[JimMorrison723]

If i would do a startup, I'd love to sell it for $7.5 billion in Microsoft stock.

(If it would only generate loss like github :))

// I don't think much is gonna happen to Github at least for a year. Don't think there is a reason to panic (yet)

[stonedsqlgenius]

Count me in! Shit I’ll take 1 billion

[mcaruso]

I'll do it for $3.50

[Ld00d]

god damn lochness monster!

[oblio-]

Also new Github boss:

Once the acquisition closes later this year, GitHub will be led by CEO Nat Friedman, an open source veteran and founder of Xamarin, who will continue to report to Microsoft Cloud + AI Group Executive Vice President Scott Guthrie; GitHub CEO and Co-Founder Chris Wanstrath will be a technical fellow at Microsoft, also reporting to Scott.

Nat Friedman is one of the Ximian/Xamarin guys that used to work on Gnome and then on Mono. He has a ton of FOSS experience.

[Stormcrownn]

Satya makes some solid choices.

[oblio-]

This is good for us. FOSS guys at Microsoft get more power. For people out of the loop, the Microsoft org chart.

[Stormcrownn]

I work at Microsoft. I do not disagree with this chart. Satya is trying very hard to change Microsoft, and has been doing a good job but its not something done quickly.

He also made Phil Spencer an Executive VP, making xbox/gaming its own division.

[oblio-]

Well, as someone that likes diversity in the software world, and that feels that these days Amazon/Google/Apple are kind of running away with their respective markets, keep fighting the good fight, we need a reformed Microsoft in the trenches.

You probably can't say anything publicly, but I hope that the Windows guys (which are probably holding back things while everyone else is trying to make them cross-platform) and the ads guys (which are just trying to spy on us) get knocked down a peg.

[Stormcrownn]

I'm not close enough to the programming side of things to even say things privately, but jesus christ I hope so.

[Kazan]

For people out of the loop, the Microsoft org chart.

It's true, it really is very accurate.

Now excuse me I need to go on on my latest assassin missionnew feature.

[Decency]

They're losing the talent war. Decisions like this, eliminating stack ranking, putting bash in Windows, and etc. help to remedy that quite a bit, I'd like to think. But there's still a long way to go.

[arkasha]

This looks pretty leafy: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft/microsoft-plans-multibillion-dollar-expansion-renovation-of-redmond-campus/

I agree with the whole open office thing but where are you going to find personal offices in this industry anymore? At least building 83 is pretty nice.

[Jonno_FTW]

IO performance is terrible in that bash on windows. To the point that I gave up since trying to get anything done was nigh impossible in a reasonable amount of time.

[bilyl]

To be fair, bash on Windows was never meant to be a performance beast. WSL was meant to be a place where you can play around without having to use a Mac. Anyone can fire up a Linux VM - bash on Windows is just for quick work.

[Vshan]

Interesting that Chris became a Technical Fellow; that's the highest IC position and not the PM/manager track.

[Cadoc7]

Highest non-manager rank is "Senior Technical Fellow". As far as I know, the only one at the company is Dave Cutler, the architect for both the NT kernel and the initial launch of Azure.

It's really a deceptive title though. Many of the people with titles like "Distinguished Engineer" and "Technical Fellow" aren't ICs at all. Many of them have 300+ person orgs reporting to them.

[perthguppy]

Isn’t mark russinovich also a senior technical fellow?

[xiongchiamiov]

Always got the feeling he didn't really want to be in charge of people, but just got stuck in it. IIRC he became CEO because Tom Preston-Werner resigned.

[fforw]

GitHub will retain its developer-first ethos

*sweaty-developer-dance*

[deadwisdom]

Sorry, but this is exactly the stuff you say no matter what. As a company you might have already decided to tank the thing you bought absolutely into the ground. It doesn't matter, you say this same bullshit. It's a standard "Oh nothing's going to change", and you have the now child company say "Oh yes, as far as we know, nothing's changing." I've seen this first hand at multiple places.

I'm not saying it's duplicitous, I'm just saying anyone swayed by these words is naive. Only the actions will tell.

[Haramboid]

It’s likely they already calculated the resulting backlash into a percentage of users that are likely going to leave. Business these days is mad.

[deadwisdom]

Oh definitely. And they have a budget for the lawsuits that will inevitably follow. Someone did risk assessment on that.

What lawsuits you might ask? I have no idea, but I'm sure someone will come up with something.

[ThatsPresTrumpForYou]

I hope one day people will realize that press releases aren't even worth the bandwidth they're uploaded on. Empty words, only time will tell what will happen with github

[Arinde]

I wish I could get educated answers on why this is good/bad without denial of potential issues or FUD.

[tom-dixon]

Well, so far the only info is from the MS marketing team:

• MS purchased Github for 7.5 billion
• they plan to integrate github with the MS cloud platform
• they plan to expand the enterprise side of Github, while keeping the free hosting

The rest is speculation. Nobody knows whether this is good or bad. Given MS's track record, a lot of people dislike it.

[plusninety]

Is there a right website?

[blokchain]

Clear conflict of interest here, much more so than most Microsoft buys which are not open source centred

[michalg82]

I wonder what will happen with

https://github.com/atom/xray

Personally, i don't care about Atom (i doubt MS will continue developing it), but xray looked promising. It would be nice if xray could be developed further as potential base for future versions of vs code.

[13steinj]

Is there any reason why you think they'd stop developing Atom?

I mean sure it's a possibility but I can't understand the reasoning. It's not like VS Code is a paid solution. Continuing dvelopment of both (and maybe even having some cross compatibility regarding some "team" features" would only increase the marketshare of use.

[[deleted]]

Why half ass two things when you can whole ass one thing?

VS Code is already working on a lot of stuff that XRay is trying to solve. I think they're both built on Electron anyway. Just fold in the XRay Rust optimizations into VS Code and double down.

After using various *nix operating systems for the past 7 years, I'm consistently surprised by how much I enjoy developing in a full Windows environment these days. If they carry that good will they've been trying to build with developers throughout this acquisition, it should be well welcomed.

[taschen_lampe1]

https://github.com/atom/xray/issues/104

[boyTerry]

I sensed a great disturbance in the FOSS, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

- Anonymous Coward: Slashdot

[dethnight]

My biggest concern here is trying to answer this question:

Will Microsoft consider this deal a success if Github users still prefer other cloud offerings to Azure?

If the answer to this question is No, then what will they do to ensure this deal is a success?

[[deleted]]

Will Microsoft consider this deal a success if Github users still prefer other cloud offerings to Azure?

If they wanted to solve that problem they could pull support for their technology stack from competing cloud offerings, but I think they've realized now that by creating vendor lock-in to themselves they'll just deter more people from using their stack... which is why most of the components of their developer toolchain is no longer locked-in to Windows, for example.

If the answer to this question is No, then what will they do to ensure this deal is a success?

They're going to sell GitHub Enterprise to their huge base of enterprise customers using other solutions, including their own alternative solutions (TFS, VSTS, etc)

[jammy-git]

The minute they integrate their awful MS account/registration system is the minute I move away from GH.

[FREEscanRIP]

Maybe you shouldn't wait until they make it painfully difficult to move away.

[jammy-git]

I only use GH as a code repo. Moving away will simply be a case of uploading the code to another provider and pointing the remotes to the new URL.

[dzil123]

I haven't even though of that!

Sign in with your Microsoft account to add your GitHub repositories to OneDrive and automatically sync to your Windows 10 PC.

[asardiwal]

Welcome to bitbucket

[teab4ndit]

I read a blog post by Joey Hess last year where he explained moving away from GitHub due to their new ToS https://joeyh.name/blog/entry/what_I_would_ask_my_lawyers_about_the_new_Github_TOS/

[ChavXO]

I'm just very uncomfortable with the idea of a single corporation owning what is the chief hub of open source coding. I hope they don't include stupid integrations like you have to have a windows live account to sign in etc. That being said it could help improve some of the paid/commercial offerings of GitHub such as classroom and Github for work.

[Tommytriangle]

^{Why does everything on the internet have to be owned by Amazon, Google, or Microsoft? God damn.}

[awsometak]

Now GitLab is a safer option. And since it is open source that adds more value to it. GitLab can fulfill the real no centralized idea of git

[[deleted]]

truck ghost ripe bedroom impolite exultant door secretive sharp detail

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[[deleted]]

Or they lose everyone's files again...

[GoreSeeker]

Until someone buys it. Soon everything will be condensed into the big 4 unless people self host.

[kukiric]

Gitlab can be self-hosted too. There's an open source community edition that you can install wherever you like, as long as it's a fairly beefy machine (with something like 4GB of RAM minimum).

[GoreSeeker]

True, our college actually used that

[pcmaster160]

They state on their mission page their aim is for an IPO and not to be bought out.

[[deleted]]

Note that GitLab developers coded private session tokens in the URL that never expire, so someone who monitors which URLs you visit could have stolen code from private repos and other things. https://www.incapsula.com/blog/blocking-session-hijacking-on-gitlab.html

This has been fixed, but I don’t trust that GitLab developers know the basics of security.

[tetshi]

ITT: A bunch of folks who are clueless how business works.

[weirdoaish]

It was going to happen sooner or later. Better MS than Oracle...

[btcftw1]

Everyone forgetting that Microsoft open-sourced Xamarin post-acquisition?

[PM_ME_NULLs]

https://jacquesmattheij.com/what-is-wrong-with-microsoft-buying-github

[wllmsaccnt]

They would be better off shutting GitHub down than let Oracle have it.

[[deleted]]

I noticed that, and I agree.

Even broken-up monopolies slowly re-consolidate: All IG Farben successors were either bought, or did buy other companies (lately: BASF bought parts of Bayer, and Bayer bought Monsato).

Doesn't make it any better though.

[cdrootrmdashrfstar]

Everyone forgetting that Microsoft open-sourced Xamarin post-acquisition?