Re:Zig quits GitHub, says Microsoft's AI obsession has ruine...
by lukeschlather on Wednesday December 03, 2025 @11:14AM
(#46136216)
Github was faster than BitBucket and it worked well whether or not JavaScript was enabled. This does seem to be regressing as of late. I have tried a variety of alternatives; they have all been slower, but Github does seem to be regressing.
Re:Zig quits GitHub, says Microsoft's AI obsession has ruine...
by ethbr1 on Wednesday December 03, 2025 @09:32AM
(#46134901)
Mercurial was/is nice and imho smooths off a lot of the unnecessarily rough git edges.
But VCS has always been a standard-preferring space, because its primary point is collaboration, so using something different creates a lot of pain.
And the good ship SS Linux Kernel was a lot of mass for any non-git solution to compete with.
Re:Zig quits GitHub, says Microsoft's AI obsession has ruine...
by magicalhippo on Wednesday December 03, 2025 @01:58PM
(#46138468)
> Technically so was BitBucket
The big reason I recall was that GitHub provided free public repos and limited private, while BitBucket was the opposite.
So if you primarily worked with open-source, GitHub was the better choice in that regard.
And for those who don’t remember SourceForge, it had two major problems in DevEx: first you couldn’t just get your open source project published. It had to be approved. And once it did, you had an ugly URL. GitHub had pretty URLs.
I remember putting up my very first open source project back before GitHub and going through this huge checklist of what a good open source project must have. Then seeing that people just tossed code onto GitHub as is: no man pages, no or little documentation, build instructions that resulted in errors, no curated changelog, and realizing that things are changing.