Slashdot Mirror


Developers Frustrated with GitHub Prod For Changes In Bug Reports, Transparency

DeveloperTech reports that a group of GitHub developers have posted an open letter, with nearly 1300 signatures, expressing dissatisfaction with GitHub's processes and policies, and in particular the site's level of transparency. A slice of the letter: "Those of us who run some of the most popular projects on GitHub feel completely ignored by you. We’ve gone through the only support channel that you have given us either to receive an empty response or even no response at all," he wrote. "We have no visibility into what has happened with our requests, or whether GitHub is working on them. Since our own work is usually done in the open and everyone has input into the process, it seems strange for us to be in the dark about one of our most important project dependencies."

4 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Sourceforge by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    That is why I only use sourceforge. It is completely transparent. As an added bonus I get malware with my downloads.

  2. Re:It's free by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should make their money off of concerts and selling tshirts and merchandise.

  3. Re:really? by bondsbw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But consider that GitHub would be nothing without the amazing number of free and open projects that it hosts, or without the free and open Git system that runs it.

    They can still provide quick and personal support for a cost, or require payment for all support if that's the business model that suits them best. But to say they will provide free support and then not really do it or not really provide insight into the status of the ticket, that can frustrate potential paying customers and those who would have paid for better support from the beginning.

    --
    All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
  4. Re:It's free beer by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Informative

    git is decentralised, in that every copy of the repository is identical in functionality, there isnt a client-server model going on. However, GitHubs advantage over plain git is in its value adds, which include being off site (many people dont have an offsite they can push to) and the PR handling system, the UI improvements, issue tracking etc etc etc.

    GitHub doesnt disturb the decentralised aspect of git (although many people treat the GitHub copy as a server to push and pull from, but you are more than able to PR direct to a team member, or involve other off site repositories and only push to GH on occasion), but its value adds are most definitely centralised but most definitely not git.

    You can happily use git on its own, on your servers, with no issue.