Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Closes Its $7.5 Billion Purchase of GitHub (techcrunch.com)
Microsoft has official closed its acquisition of GitHub, the Git-based code sharing and collaboration service with 31 million developers. "The Redmond, WA-based software behemoth first said it would acquire GitHub for $7.5 billion in stock in June of this year, and after the acquisition closed it would continue to run it as an independent platform and business," reports TechCrunch. From the report: The acquisition is yet another sign of how Microsoft has been doubling down on courting developers and presenting itself as a neutral partner to help them with their projects. That is because, despite its own very profitable proprietary software business, Microsoft also has a number of other businesses -- for example, Azure, which competes with AWS and Google Cloud -- that rely heavily on it being unbiased towards one platform or another. And GitHub, Microsoft hopes, will be another signal to the community of that position. In that regard, it will be an interesting credibility test for the companies. Nat Friedman, previously the CEO of Xamarin, will be the CEO of GitHub on Monday. He says the site will be run as an independent platform and business.
"We will always support developers in their choice of any language, license, tool, platform, or cloud," he writes, noting that there will be more tools to come. "We will continue to build tasteful, snappy, polished tools that developers love," he added.
"We will always support developers in their choice of any language, license, tool, platform, or cloud," he writes, noting that there will be more tools to come. "We will continue to build tasteful, snappy, polished tools that developers love," he added.
What the FUCK is he talking about? Microsoft has been hellbent on making GARBAGE the last 15+ years...
You mean GNU?
GitHub made an application framework called Electron that is essentially a copy of Chrome hardcoded to view one website. Applications built with Electron, such as Slack, Discord, and modern Skype, tend to be RAM hogs, well into the triple digit MB per application. On laptops with 4 GB or less RAM, the swap pressure caused by running more than one Electron application at once makes Emacs look like "Eight Megs And Constantly Smooth".
So I guess with the purchase of GitHub made official, we can officially refer to this as "Microsoft Electron".
Sorry Microsoft. You pissed all over the PC industry, acted malicious, subverted standards, wrote the least secure major OS on the market, tried to make the web be "Microsoft-Only", and have generally been a bad actor for decades. You set personal computing back a decade and half if not more.
Guess what? Git is DECENTRALIZED. That means you don't get to have lock-in just because you bought github.
Bye bye!
Have gnu, will travel.
The fact that Nat Friedman is heading this up is cause for me to lower my machete and molotov. Nat is a smart guy, and if given the opportunity hes shown he knows how to deliver what the community wants.
the canary for Microsofts acquisition however is, also, Nat. Once he resigns its an impossible act to follow for Microsofts dyed-in-the-wool chain of command. Theyll need to continue the momentum, redouble their commitment to the community and maintain good communication. Gitlab and Sourceforge are too readily available, too easy to use, and have all the same features as github. Microsoft is literally banking on their ability to curate a very perceptive userbase...something they have failed to do time and time again
Good people go to bed earlier.
Hello Gitlab
Extend, check ...
In Soviet Russia government extracts all intellectual property from you.
In Capitalist West M$ becomes partner to intellectual property created by you.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I do not use their software or platforms.
I'm now on gitlab.
Let's just assume that Microsoft will follow their overwhelming modus operandi and screw this up.
See you all over at gitlab?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
I hope MS does right by linux users, but...I'm sceptical given
the skype experience.
What is worth the 7.5 billion, clearly not the web interface nor the domain name. Is it advertisement opportunity, access to the email addresses to file lawsuits on patent infringement or the ability to morph the terms for their favor?
Maybe now Microsoft will start using decent version control and branching for developing their Windows product...
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
I'd rather Microsoft supported software users rather than software developers.
Ask me about repetitive DNA
It'll be the license, modified so that you give permission for Microsoft to use anything you've put on GitHub in a closed source product, regardless of any license you use, and to make Microsoft co-owners.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Why stop using SourceSafe now?
Besides, can they? SourceSafe suffers random database corruption. They might not be able to move off it.
Anyway, a more advanced source control system could include RCS and SCCS. The extra features of RCS might confuse Microsoft developers at first, but they'd manage. They'd never cope with Git, totally alien to their mindset.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I've taken another look.
Same attitudes, same abuse towards rivals, same embrace extend extinguish policy, same buying out success stories to illegally leverage a monopoly in other markets, same buggy products.
Gates wasn't the one who ordered the ISO group bribed to certify their Office data format as a standard. Bribery is wrong, even when done by slightly less rich people.
Gates didn't violate antitrust law by bundling Edge with Windows 10.
Gates didn't buy out Mojang or dismantle the community there.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Note: there are attempts at forks, though they do not have very much to them (yet).
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
I moved all my repositories off of github, and deleted my github account. Then I went on a downloading spree and grabbed as much repositories as I could on the day the deal was announced. Since then I've been slowly uploading to notabug doublechecking that I have everything - the goal will be to have an OS that has 0 github maintained code in it, and *definitely* no github code without a license in it. I have a thread on NSA/Facebook if anyone would like to help coordinate this effort.
I will never use github again, and code which treats github code as upstream will be migrated away from github to a non-microsoft platform first. Microsoft can suck sand if they think after a decade of war that I will ever touch any of their products again. If they think they can take over and extinguish the free software movement, they are wrong.
Current task: getting a new gogs instance up since i hit my repository limit on notabug
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
SourceSafe suffers random database corruption. They might not be able to move off it.
MS never used SourceSafe internally. They used an internal licensed fork of Perforce.
They'd never cope with Git, totally alien to their mindset.
They've been using git to manage Windows for over a year now, as well as many other projects, and they've contributed back some of the work they did to support extremely large repositories (~300GB). git support is even directly integrated into Visual Studio now.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
Just a matter of time before this is shuttered. "What, the FL/OSS people use it? We must buy it and shut it down, or turn it to shit so they won't use it." This has been M$'s MO for a while. The good news is there are alternatives, and hopefully people removed anything important before they got their grimy little hands on it.
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
Has any evidence of this planned TOS change been made public?
Gates didn't violate antitrust law by bundling Edge with Windows 10.
The only difference between that and the behavior that prompted U.S. v. Microsoft and BrowserChoice.eu is that Internet Explorer wasn't called Edge yet.
Now, if people would only publish a repo once the program was actually working and useful...
I'll assume "actually working and useful" means roughly the same as "minimum viable product". Is that what you meant? If so, I have trouble believing that you meant "don't back up the repository at all until the MVP is complete". Did you instead mean "pay Microsoft $84 per year to keep your backup private until the MVP is complete"?