News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by MBCook on Sunday June 03, 2018 @08:43PM (#17223523)
Is it? I imagine VSS and their cloud source control offering (don’t remember the name) probably aren’t doing all that well in the face of GitHub.

They want to be a player in that game, so they’ll transition off they are old product which isn’t that popular onto a new one they purchased that has all the mind share.

As long as they don’t screw it up, and recent Microsoft seems to me like a company that won’t, it will benefit them. And perhaps it will benefit the user some to do have a company with deep pockets behind it.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by major505 on Sunday June 03, 2018 @09:39PM (#17223820)
Microsoft adopt git as their main source control, even in internal projects.

Makes sense they try to control the future of the tool they use in so meny projects.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by RyanZAG on Monday June 04, 2018 @03:13AM (#17225303)
Github don't control git --

> Torvalds turned over maintenance on 26 July 2005 to Junio Hamano, a major contributor to the project.[25] Hamano was responsible for the 1.0 release on 21 December 2005, and remains the project's maintainer.[26]

I'm guessing Torvalds still has a lot of control if push came to shove, so we can assume git is executively controlled by Torvalds and Hamano.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by feenix566 on Monday June 04, 2018 @10:02AM (#17227847)
Not many people use git without Github though, whether it's Github proper or a local installation of Github Enterprise. It's pretty tough to do code reviews without it. There are tools out there to do it, but Github is the standard.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by Zash on Monday June 04, 2018 @06:47AM (#17226487)
Github does own a vast share of the git-related developer mindshare tho, which is probably more valuable to Microsoft.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by stephenr on Sunday June 03, 2018 @11:04PM (#17224253)
Git != GitHub, fyi.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by Fill1200 on Monday June 04, 2018 @12:49AM (#17224747)
I want Mercurial and Subversion in GitHub.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by stephenr on Monday June 04, 2018 @12:59AM (#17224792)
Why not just use a service that supports them?
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by ergo14 on Monday June 04, 2018 @07:14AM (#17226661)
Use RhodeCode then - but it is a self-hosted solution.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by malkia on Sunday June 03, 2018 @10:02PM (#17223933)
AFAIK, I don't think anyone seriously used VSS inside Microsoft, but heard that long time ago they forked perforce in customized way... A bit like google.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by OkGoDoIt on Sunday June 03, 2018 @11:37PM (#17224397)
Yes, I used that internal Source Depot (based on Perforce I think, or at least something old and convoluted) when I worked on Windows Phone 7 back in 2010, it was not fun. There were a few teams within Microsoft at the time using the visual studio team system source control but I don’t believe it was common, as a lot of the error reporting (watson) had plug-ins for the proprietary Source Depot.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by asveikau on Monday June 04, 2018 @12:47AM (#17224739)
Why was it not fun? I had no trouble with sourcedepot when I was there.

I think git and decentralized source control are great, but I get a little suspicious of people saying tooling is "not fun" simply because it isn't their favorite or most familiar.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by OkGoDoIt on Monday June 04, 2018 @12:58AM (#17224779)
That’s fair, I’m probably being too harsh on it. It was my first job out of college so my first time interacting with professional-scale source control. I don’t remember specifically what I didn’t like about it, I think mostly that it was slow and a bit unintuitive, but I can’t say with any conviction that it was actually a bad system. I do remember there being a general sense on my team that people wanted to move off of it and onto something more modern, so perhaps I just internalized that.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by hestefisk on Monday June 04, 2018 @06:24AM (#17226357)
Ugh, Perforce. That was painful. Perhaps it’s time to see what’s next in source control systems, ie bzr.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by malkia on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @03:04AM (#17235530)
Hah, our team is a bit of split - half of us know perforce well, the other half git, then almost all other developers are perforce driven (game company with several studios).

I like it, and really love that they added web interface (review, overall view of changes, etc.).

P4 is very easy to get started, all you need is to learn several things, and tools underneath can easily be changed, learned to do this for you. Then it's easy to comprehend changes, since all CL's are monotonically increasing, so once gets perception when a CL is announced whether it affects him, or her, etc.

And the elephant in the room is the really, really huge files: psd, tiff, max, maya (ma/mb) models, fbx, zip, iso, exe installs, etc.

There are some peculiarities, like text files handling and conversion (e.g. \r\n <-> \n).

Then some useful (but controversial) features: locking (per extension), or manually per file.

Having all your projects from different teams in one place, but each team/project can customize a view to its own work (a bit opposite of what google is doing with their mono-repo, but unlike g4 there ain't option to sync only what you want, and have the rest off the network).