Slashdot Mirror
GitHub Free Users Now Get Unlimited Private Repositories (techcrunch.com)
GitHub has always offered free accounts, but users were forced to make their code public. To get private repositories, you had to pay. Now, as TechCrunch reports, "Free GitHub users now get unlimited private projects with up to three collaborators." From the report: The amount of collaborators is really the only limitation here and there's no change to how the service handles public repositories, which can still have unlimited collaborators. This feels like a sign of goodwill on behalf of Microsoft, which closed its acquisition of GitHub last October, with former Xamarin CEO Nat Friedman taking over as GitHub's CEO.
Talking about teams, GitHub also today announced that it is changing the name of the GitHub Developer suite to 'GitHub Pro.' The company says it's doing so in order to "help developers better identify the tools they need." But what's maybe even more important is that GitHub Business Cloud and GitHub Enterprise (now called Enterprise Cloud and Enterprise Server) have become one and are now sold under the 'GitHub Enterprise' label and feature per-user pricing. In response, GitLab CEO Sid Sijbrandij said: "GitHub today announced the launch of free private repositories with up to three collaborators. GitLab has offered unlimited collaborators on private repositories since the beginning. We believe Microsoft is focusing more on generating revenue with Azure and less on charging for DevOps software. At GitLab, we believe in a multi-cloud future where organizations use multiple public cloud platforms."
Talking about teams, GitHub also today announced that it is changing the name of the GitHub Developer suite to 'GitHub Pro.' The company says it's doing so in order to "help developers better identify the tools they need." But what's maybe even more important is that GitHub Business Cloud and GitHub Enterprise (now called Enterprise Cloud and Enterprise Server) have become one and are now sold under the 'GitHub Enterprise' label and feature per-user pricing. In response, GitLab CEO Sid Sijbrandij said: "GitHub today announced the launch of free private repositories with up to three collaborators. GitLab has offered unlimited collaborators on private repositories since the beginning. We believe Microsoft is focusing more on generating revenue with Azure and less on charging for DevOps software. At GitLab, we believe in a multi-cloud future where organizations use multiple public cloud platforms."
Run! Rabbit! Run!
Find it on github.
[($)]
Bitbucket is the place you go if you want a free private git repository on the cloud, so this is simply competition, not goodwill.
.io comes from a crown dependency in the middle of the indian ocean, whose only occupants are british and american military. the cctld is administered by a british company.
yup. totally owned by the chinese.
So No thanks.
Their competitors offer free private repos, and it's one of the major reasons people use GitLab and BitBucket. Those platforms are not as nice as GitHub, but private repos are free.
So they get increased market share from this.
Obviously if you idea is super secret you don't want to use this.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I still don't get how a "pro" isn't capable of self-hosting a git repo. Perhaps souped-up with {gitolite,gitlab,gitea,...}.
Perhaps these are MCSE pros, then I'd understand.
The reason people pay for hosting things is that... people don't want to host things themselves. Being pro or not has nothing to do with it. Personally, I'd rather spend time working on my project than working on potential security issues that keep popping up with self-hosted stuff.
Some people even lease cars, instead of buying them.
Private... right...
At a company I ran in 1990s we self-hosted version control, email, everything. We assembled our own servers, we wrote out own highly secure password manager. We did everything ourselves. We saved a lot of money vs buying. We also spent so much time and attention on handling our own infrastructure that we had little energy left to put toward our actual business, building our customer base, our brand, etc.
If I run a company again, I may let someone else worry about some of infrastructure while we worry about the things our business does.
If you're big enough to care or be of interest to Microsoft, you're big enough to run "apt-get install git" and configure it yourself on your own server.
If you're a hobbyist programmer, writing open-source, etc, want to pull in "unofficial" patches to projects, but don't want to embarrass yourself to the world, a free, unlimited and private repo isn't something to be sniffed at.
No different to Google Code (which I think is dead now?). I used to host all my own code - that nobody would ever care about, contains nothing secret, is highly-specialised to my preferences, etc. - on Google Code because it was cheaper and "safer" than renting a server to do so.
If you just want a server to push patches to, that you can access from anyway, and don't want to have it publicly searchable, in full view of everyone, or don't want to work under an OS licence, or you just want a backup of your own repos, something like this is fine. And literally doesn't affect their core customers - such people wouldn't pay for external hosting either. But if you can accustom them to your product then when they *do* decide to turn their hobby code into a business app, they may well pay you just to keep things simple.
Can do the same at home with a VPN/SSH tunnel and it IS private.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
We know how Microsoft handles "private" user data it has access to.
I still don't get how a "pro" isn't capable of self-hosting a git repo.
Say you want to install Gitea, a self-hosted Git server, and make it visible to your remote collaborators. First you have to buy a domain name. Then you have to subscribe to a VPS because your ISP bans running an Internet-visible server on your plan or its carrier-grade NAT won't forward you an inbound port.
A real "pro" is also always conscious of costs vs benefits in how and where they spend their time.
Your repo must be rebooted to an earlier state to make it more awesome.
Your preference:
[ ] Now
[x] Later
Thank you.
Choosing random commit and rebooting Now!
Requiem for the American Dream
I mean also how much developer time can you buy for $14/ month or whatever it is. You only have to waste 30 minutes faffing about and you're immediately making a bad choice financially. I *can* self-host, but I'm an app developer, I'm probably better off improving the product instead.
Having private repos is nice and all but CI is equally as important.
With that said, Gitlab + Gitlab CI is free to use and is a perfect match for solo developers or small teams with private projects, without having to invest in any additional services or infrastructure.
Where as on Github, if you have private repos, you can't use Travis CI for free, so now you have to choose between Azure pipelines (which is more limiting than Gitlab CI) or use some other free service like CircleCI which is also more limiting than Gitlab CI and in both cases you need to integrate third party tools into Github where as on Gitlab, it's all bundled in and ready to go.
I am really curious why the Gitlab CEO didn't talk about that. Any developer deploying web apps knows that CI is an essential tool.
> "This feels like a sign of goodwill on behalf of Microsoft"
Translation: "Microsoft has decided to kill BitBucket."
Gitlab has a nice self-hosted open source project with federation and moderately-mature UI.
Nobody is going to trust some kids' project when they get a .io and post as AC on /. trashing other open source projects.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Of course I have a server "out there".
Many don't. And for some that do, such as myself, the server that we are leasing is restricted to run only web hosting because it is shared hosting, not a (more expensive) VPS.
Of course my ISP doesn't ban anything (otherwise I'd just switch)
Switching from one ISP that serves a given city to the other ISP that serves the same city doesn't work for everyone. Some countries have such a small allocation of IPv4 addresses that all ISPs in those countries have made it a standard practice to put a whole neighborhood behind one IP address. To upgrade to a static IP, you have to incorporate a business in order to qualify for a business-class line and then lease static IPs for a substantial extra monthly fee. (Source: comment by Bert64) Is switching worth emigrating from your home country?
I'm currently paying the small fee a month for private repos. (My plan cost is on the order of Netflix and Hulu and the like, something like under 10$ a month.) I'd really like to switch to this new plan, but don't want to lose my current private repos in the process. Any ideas when this will be available on the site, or how to configure your account with this free plan?
I regularly visit your site and find a lot of interesting information. Not only good posts but also great impossible game. Thank you and look forward to your page growing stronger