Its all about the regressions, not finding anything novel
Though I wish I was entirely kidding. ~12 years ago or so we did that if one of two parallel development teams had to modify a message of the network protocol to avoid incompatibilities and merge problems.
Mind you, these were SVN merges. I can't even verbalize my feelings about SVN merges but by a mixture of laughing and groaning in pain, like if you stubbed your toe in a painful, but entirely funny way.
Git in turn made branches easier, causing merges to be more prevalent and developers overall learned to merge more, merge more often.
What types of merges are we talking about? Surely it must be where you merge in changes from a main branch to your local branch, which in the case of long-lived branches will be the more common merge. Creating new branches isn't even part of that workflow.
Run ansible and you can screw it all up
or run vi from ssh
I would give that a 5/10 accuracy at best!
(Disclosure: GitHub employee)
(+WebHooks) (+Issues)
I am not sure about tangled.sh, I might ask them in their discord about this now y'know.
The Linux kernel developers have been using that workflow for a lot of time. Maybe still now.
[1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch
Yes, they do. Git itself is also developed that way.
Btw, you don't need to use format + send-email, send-email calls format-patch under the hood
Why?
What features do you feel like git is missing?
https://www.businessinsider.com/github-ceo-developers-embrac...
So many clowns. It's like everyone's reading from the same script/playbook. Nothing says "this tool is useful" quite like forcing people to use it.
I'd assume that many CEO are driven by the same urge to please the board. And depending on your board, there might be people on it who spend many hours per week on LinkedIn, and see all the success stories around AI, maybe experienced something first hand.
Good news: It's, from my estimate, only a phase. Like when blockchain hit, and everyone wanted to be involved. This time - and that worries me - the ressources involved are more expensive, though. There might be a stronger incentive for people to "get their money back". I haven't thought about the implications yet.
AI is more like the early web. There is definite value that people can see, but no one really knows how to monetize beyond the incredibly obvious 'sell people access to it', so everyone is throwing spaghetti at the wall waiting for it to stick. When someone gets it to stick, there will be a giant amount of money coming at them, but until then there will be a ton of people with sauce all over their faces looking like idiots.
Humans don't behave this way. Yet, we still employ humans. AI is unreliable. We all agree. But that does not make it useless.
CEO1: "This technology is the biggest technical leap in my lifetime!"
CEO2: "Oh yea? Well, this technology is more useful than electricity!"
CEO3: "Oh yea?? This technology is more impactful than the invention of fire!"
VP1: "This technology is going to really help improve productivity!"
VP2: "Come on! This technology is going to let one person do the work of 100!"
VP3: "Surely you jest! Without using this technology, you might as well not even try to earn a living!"
Not necessarily saying this AI is worth switching to yet. It could fizzle out, we'll see. But I'm saying if it's truly worth it's salt, it'll take off because it's good, rather than die despite being good.
Things that this aren't true for are things that are only marginally better. if A is 5% better but B is 95% more popular.. A might yet die because it's not worth switching to. AI is claiming a lot more than 5% gains though
> the rise of AI in software development signals the need for computer science education to be reinvented as well.
> Teaching in a way that evaluates rote syntax or memorization of APIs is becoming obsolete
He thinks computer science is about memorizing syntax and APIs. No wonder he's telling developers to embrace AI or quit their careers if he believes the entire field is that shallow. Not the best person to take advice from.
It's also hilarious how he downplays fundamental flaws of LLMs as something AI zealots, the truly smart people, can overcome by producing so much AI slop that they turn from skeptics into ...drumroll... AI strategists. lol
There's a lot of cowboy development going on out there. Why not take this opportunity to talk to your customers for a bit? Make sure you're still building the right things.
At any decently-sized org, the developers are not allowed to talk to customers on their own accord.
If the business is afraid to let you email the customer, you might need to work on your communications skills and go through some intentional demonstration efforts. For example, "Good morning <boss>, here's a draft of what I think we should send <CTO's name @ customer> regarding their feedback on the last build.".
That's literally all it takes to get into the game. Don't ask for permission to write the draft because then your managers will think it's gonna be this big ordeal and they'll definitely say no.
At a B2C, I would not email a customer directly without sign-off. We have marketing teams, research teams, comms, customer support, etc. I would be stepping on so many toes, and risking brand reputation, if I were to interact with our customers.
This has been the case before VCSes existed.
How they would deploy the older container, I don't know.
A lot of this is guesswork, I don't work for them or anything. And I know that GHES in the way that my employer manages it is very unlike the way that GitHub host github.com, so everything i've assumed could be wrong.
The pipeline for deploying the monolith doesn’t happen in GitHub Actions though but in a service based in jenkins.
Fun fact: playbooks for incidents used to be hosted in GitHub too but we moved them after an incident that made impossible to access them while it lasted.
Couldn't they just be checked out by cron on any number of local machines hosting Apache?
If you deliberately decide to use a system that introduces a single point of failure into a decentralised system, you have to live with the consequences.
From their point of view, unless they start losing paying users over this, they have no incentive to improve. I assume customers are happy with the SLA, otherwise why use Github?
sucks for people that use issues/PRs for coordination and had a planning meeting scheduled, though
And forgejo doesn't have feature parity at all with gitlab. Neither does github, for that matter.
Just take a look at how to push container images from a cicd pipeline in gitlab vs. Forgejo.
Pushing images is a oneliner.
See here: https://mteixeira.wordpress.com/2025/02/03/my-self-hosted-fo...
Lol.
> ...and Gitlab went corpo.
How else will they sustain/maintain such a product and compete with the likes of GitHub? With donations? Good luck.
At this point Gitlab is just there because being even a small X% of a huge million/billion dollar market is good enough as a company even if the product is almost unusable.
I used to run a GitLab instance for my own needs, however keeping up with the updates (especially across major versions) proved to be a bit too much and it was quite resource hungry.
My personal stack right now is Gitea + Drone CI + Nexus, though I might move over to Woodpecker CI in the future and also maybe look for alternatives to Nexus (it's also quite heavyweight and annoying to admin).
I can't say that I'm having issues with the performance either. I work with large PRs too (Especially if there's vendored dependencies) but I never ran into a show stopping performance issue that would make it "useless".
I remember GitHub from years ago. I still find myself looking for things that were there years ago but have since moved.
Also, GitHub search is (still) comically useless. I just clone and use grep instead.
I think we're using two different products. Off the top of my head, I can think of Github Projects (the Trello-like feature), Github Marketplace, Github Discussions, the complete revamp of the file-viewer/editor, and all the new AI/LLM-based stuff baked into yet another feature known as Codespaces.
> I can't say that I'm having issues with the performance either. I work with large PRs too
Good for you. I suffered for maybe 4 years from this, and so have many others: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/39341
The same since when?
Many forges are working on a federated development infrastructure. That's great. But I believe that for these platforms to really become popular, we must solve the problem of federated project search and discovery as well. Unfortunately, nobody seems to be paying much attention in this area.
I can almost guarentee we will. Consumers love simplicity through centralization.
> Trust in American companies, and big companies in general has been eroded.
Where are you seeing that? I've seen general dislike of large corpos forever, and the anti-US sentiment is more common abroad from places like Europe that have never 'liked' US culture and companies.
I've been pushing my repos to a random $5 server I have for years now. It's been rock solid. But I have no UI. I can push and pull and it supports exactly 1 user (me) and it's never gone down because I just never touch the server. I did go the extra mile to set up automatic backups but that's it.
An issue tracker and code explorer would be nice.
Tangential, but... I was so excited by their frontend, which was slowly adopting web components, until after acquisition by Microsoft they started rewriting it in React.
(Design is still very solid though!)
https://www.developer-tech.com/news/embrace-ai-or-leave-care...
Maybe his developers embraced AI a bit too much? Or maybe they left the field?
People seem to forget Git was meant to be decentralized.
I agree with the sentiment though.
I'm like ok... So they're "distributed".. how do I share the code with other people? Oh..I push to a central repository? So it's almost exactly like SVN? Cool cool.
Why is GitHub UI getting slower? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44799861 - Aug 2025 (76 comments)
Weirdly people were less angry about it back then than we seem to be today.
SwiftyBug•6mo ago
AdventureMouse•6mo ago
1718627440•6mo ago