| ▲ | mitchellh 10 hours ago |
| I know this is ridiculously dramatic, but its the truth: I actually cried writing this blog post (tears hit my keyboard, I'm embarrassed to say). Nobody should cry over a SaaS, of all things. But GitHub has meant so much more to me than that (all laid out in the post). I have an unhealthy relationship with it. Its given me so much and I'm so thankful for it. But, it's not what it used to be. I don't know. We've been discussing it off and on for months, really started seriously discussing it a couple weeks ago, and made the final decision a few days ago. Putting metaphorical pen to paper and hitting "publish" makes it so very real. I'm sure folks will make fun of me for this. It is a stupid thing. But I truly love GitHub, and I hope they find their way. |
|
| ▲ | idan 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Hi there! Longtime fan and hubber here. It's okay to have emotions. I have similar emotions. I'm GitHub User 22723 which is effectively the same as you (considering there's ~180m GH accounts nowadays) My version of your post reads differently: "GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better" Walking away would be easy. I felt that way when I left Heroku ~six years ago. I left that job and never opened the Heroku dashboard again, after nearly a decade of happy use. I felt that it was irredeemable, and though it took a while, Salesforce did eventually succeed in running it fully into the ground. I don't feel the same about GitHub. It is precisely because it's precious that I can't walk away. I'm not the only one here who feels that way. In the past few years, GitHub has absorbed both a fundamental paradigm shift (agentic coding) AND several different hockey sticks of growth. It's messy. I'm not always proud of the results or the product choices we are forced into. But none of it feels like the Heroku/Salesforce debacle. Occam's razor applies here: it's not "more AI coding" and it's not "big bad Microsoft." It's scale, and a fundamental shift of the ground under all of our feet. I hope we do the things that will make you want to come back. I hope we spark that joy in you again! It's not stupid to have big feelings about something that is so central to our lives as developers. Fuck that noise. |
| |
| ▲ | margalabargala 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > "GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better" This is true but misleading. Unfortunately. It is a true statement for developers working in GitHub at Microsoft. It's not a true statement for users. There is no avenue by which you make GitHub better by continuing to use it as it has been. | | |
| ▲ | stock_toaster 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Strongly agree. And not only that, but time has _already_ shown the continued degradation of the github experience even with users ostensibly sticking around trying to "make it better". | |
| ▲ | lacker 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > There is no avenue by which you make GitHub better by continuing to use it as it has been. I feel like in a very mundane sense, I pay GitHub for a service, and they use that money to pay developers, to then make GitHub better. It's tough to be working somewhere when usage is booming, and your service is crashing all the time. It's also tough to migrate your infrastructure between platforms, which it sounds like GitHub finally has to do in order to scale to the next level, to really take advantage of being part of Microsoft, although that has to feel pretty frustrating in the short term. So hang in there GitHub team. Just keep fixing things. | |
| ▲ | jomar 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Indeed. Back in 2018 and 2019 I expended a fair amount of time and energy reporting a squash 'n' merge metadata rewriting bug to GitHub and advocating for the behaviour to be changed. [1] Once or twice someone internal to GitHub got interested... and then drifted away again. Years later the broken behaviour remains. And I'm a lot more cynical about thinking GitHub fundamentals might ever get any better. [1] https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1368 | |
| ▲ | goodmythical 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'd honestly argue the opposite. Staying with an abusive partner is not likely to resolve the abuse, no matter how much you think so. Ghostty and others leaving might be the only way that active users could actively and visibly signal a need for change. | | |
| ▲ | lossyalgo 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think OP is basically applying "vote with your wallet" strategy and/or some kind of "action speaks louder than words". As I understood from the article, they have been vocal about trying to change things, but they are shouting into the ether since nothing has changed and in fact only getting worse. | |
| ▲ | meken 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There’s a difference between a relationship with a person and an organization. I think the difference is large enough that the analogy doesn’t really hold. | | |
| ▲ | zamalek 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Exactly, only humans should have at least one chance to grow and improve. Orgs are heartless legal entities that deserve no loyalty whatsoever, they are all one acquisition away from turning on you (as a customer or an employee). | |
| ▲ | pinkgolem 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think the example is still valid, orgs will not change if the still get what they want from you |
|
| |
| ▲ | idan 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I do work at GitHub. I shared the above as a nuanced "yes and" to the pain that Mitchell is feeling. In the same way that Mastodon didn't replace Twitter even when Twitter went to shit, I don't believe in the various GitHub alternatives becoming a broadly-used thing. Maybe we'll end up with more GitHub-alikes like Codeberg, mabye we'll end up with some communities adopting novel forges like Tangled and Forgejo. But it beggars belief that most of the millions of GitHub's users would switch to something so much more complicated. Has the same energy as "20XX is finally the year of linux on the desktop". My very personal hot take: the likeliest happy future is _most likely_ to happen through improving GitHub. I vote with my feet to do that from inside, and that's all I wanted to add. Hence "I hope we do the things that make you want to come back one day." I believe in it enough that I choose to work here on exactly that, because like Mitchell, I care very much about the platonic ideal of GitHub. He's ready to move on, and I'm not yet. There's no value judgment hiding inside that. | | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > But it beggars belief that most of the millions of GitHub's users would switch to something so much more complicated. I've moved my projects over to my own personal Forgejo (when I don't care about collaborating on them) and Codeberg (when I do). I find that ecosystem vastly simpler in the common ways that matter. For instance, viewing large diffs and syntax highlighted files is unbelievably faster, about as fast as GitHub's use to be before it was "improved". For every way I use those forges as a solo or small-group contributor, the alternatives are as good as or better than GitHub today. Some product manager could become a company legend by figuring out how and why that is, then getting someone to do something about it. | |
| ▲ | margalabargala 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm glad you are optimistic. GitHub will need employees with that attitude if they're going to pull out of their current trajectory. To be clear- from a user perspective, "improving GitHub" means "restoring reliability to what it was 6 years ago". There's no killer feature that makes people stop leaving, if my PRs don't lead every third day and actions never work. | | |
| ▲ | grogenaut 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I may have my timelines wrong but I don't remember github being rock solid 5 years ago. I remember multiple outages keeping us from pulling code for go packages that were not using an enterprise dependency cache and killing multiple days of work a year for those systems. It's what I used as a forcing function to move people TO an enterprise dependency cache, and to find the few scofflaws running work code off of github.com versus enterprise. | | | |
| ▲ | slowmovintarget 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Security: No leaking PII, no compromised build pipelines. Uptime: 4 9s minimum for paying customers for the core service (not necessarily the social features, but pull requests have to work). |
| |
| ▲ | WD-42 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Comparing to twitter is astute, as there are some analysis that point to it being mostly bots in 2025. I can see the same happening for GitHub, in fact it seems to be actively trying to move in that direction: a platform for AI agents to host code, to review code, with little to no human activity. Just like everyone who didn’t want to deal with bots left twitter, they will soon leave GitHub for similar reasons. I’m sure there is a future for GitHub as the code hosting platform for agents but it should be no surprise then when real people like Mitchell and the rest of us jump ship. | |
| ▲ | nine_k 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Speaking of a "year of Linux on desktop", it's mostly not happening because the desktop lock-in has largely eased. I of course love my Linux desktop, but I use relatively few native applications, and every one of them is multiplatform now. Windows desktop becomes less and less relevant in its own way, by degradation of experience, and by being replaced with consoles and the Steam Deck. Same may happen to GitHub. CI/CD tools and workflows can become more portable and adaptable. Independent code review tools that can use GitHub API along with a few other APIs may become popular. GitHub will become one of, not the one. I won't call it a bad outcome. | |
| ▲ | altairprime 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think a better comparison would be between GitHub and 1Password. Both started out as really excellent things for individuals and both became really awful things for individuals in their pursuit of enterprises. | | |
| ▲ | NetMageSCW 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | What do you find awful about 1Password today? | | |
| ▲ | sersi 23 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | So much to list: - They ditched their previous android app for a new one that doesn't get the grandfathered accessibility access so autofill is mostly useless... - On mac, safari integration is consistently flaky. It regularly keeps getting blocked in a loop telling me to unlock 1password when 1password has already been unlocked. - Passkeys are unreliable to the point of being unusable - Autofill frequently doesn't work well where for some reason the site with the same url as saved in 1password is not offered during autofill. When 1password used to work, it helped catch phishing attempts because it wouldn't show autofill on pages that do not match. Nowadays because of the shitty autofill, people get trained to go to the app, copy the password and paste it in the website. This means that it will no longer protect from phishing attempts - The previous behaviour of saving any newly generated password as a password object (not login) was much better. Now newly generated passwords are only available in the password history of the browser extension you specifically used. - I can't tell 1password to ignore a specific website At this point, the only reason I'm not using bitwarden is that search is very slow on it with 2k+ passwords. | |
| ▲ | altairprime 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | When I quit using 1Password, it was when they dumped native apps for electron apps and quit supporting the product I’d been buying upgrades for every couple years, in order to pivot to a cloud model that lets them imposing an enterprise subscription model for enterprise users onto individuals. Dunno what they’re up to these days, but I’d be shocked if they could last six months without enterprise customers, so I know I’m not relevant to them anymore. And that’s the same way I view GitHub — individuals are financially and strategically irrelevant to their bottom line. It’s their right, certainly, but it means I use GitHub as a Google Site replacement and my only active repo is archived whenever I’m not pushing commits to silence all the unwanted crap that comes with a GitHub repo. I’d be daft to ignore free hosting and I don’t care in the slightest that it’s one nines. Makes me laugh every time, though, to think of all those billion dollar AI-layoffs businesses having to stop AI work for a day because AI proliferation broke the freemium model and GitHub’s too hooked on being home to unfunded, mission-critical infrastructure projects to close the barn doors on free. | |
| ▲ | canes123456 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It much buggier for me since the enterprise/electron push. Autofill frequently doesn’t work. Passkeys are unreliable. Creating a new password doesn’t ever get saved. | | |
| ▲ | nothrabannosir 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | FYI I recently discovered a 1p browser extension feature named “Password Generator History”. It has a record of all generated passwords, whether their respective items ever ended up saved or not. Live saver. https://support.1password.com/recover-unsaved-password/ | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Same here. I paid for my family's accounts for many years until the app suddenly became much worse. Honestly, Apple's own Passwords app has 95% of the features of, and the ones it does have work far better than the 1P equivalent. I can't imagine paying for a personal account again. |
| |
| ▲ | codebje 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not the parent, but the only thing I really hate about 1Password is that I can't tell it to never offer to save a specific site's password. I can turn off all offers to save passwords, or I can have the stupid pop-up ask me multiple times a day if I want to save that password. The pop-up chases me across the site until I get rid of it. Aarrgh. Blood boiling. Rage overflowing. Other than that it's fine, I guess. | | |
| ▲ | cout 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I have the same complaint about lastpass. With lastpass it's doable, but I have to keep looking up how to configure a site to never site and never ask. |
| |
| ▲ | techpression 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It’s getting buggier and buggier, not being able to fill in passwords properly is kind of a glaring omission of a password manager (and that’s on three different computers).
They keep adding features but seem to show little interest in fixing bugs. I submitted debug logs, recorded videos etc but it just trickled out in the sand. And as another poster wrote, it all started going bad with the switch to Electron (might be the rust backend that is the problem, I don’t know and frankly don’t care, it just doesn’t work as well as it did before). |
|
| |
| ▲ | watwut 18 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It is actuly good for the ecosystem to have competition. Githubs quasi monopoly was a bad thing. And will continue to be a bad thing in the future if it remains | |
| ▲ | komali2 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > But it beggars belief that most of the millions of GitHub's users would switch to something so much more complicated. Has the same energy as "20XX is finally the year of linux on the desktop". This is funny, because 2025-on seems to be starting some couple years of Linux on the desktop/laptop. Valve introduced millions of people to gaming on Linux, bazzite is exploding in popularity, and that popularity is pouring into other projects like Omarchy, Mint, Ubuntu. GitHub maybe will end up like Twitter - where the people who are there are there because they have to be, while the people actually enjoying their time online are on different platforms. | | |
| ▲ | pinkgolem 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I joined a startup 3 years ago as employe 6. everyone was using windows but I was used to working with macos so I got a mac. Took a year till everyone was using a Mac. |
| |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | godelski 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The problem is that from the outside it seems like Microsoft no longer cares about the product. So much so that "the product" has become "shareholders"[0]. We've just been moving into a world where metric hacking is the desired outcome, not an outcome to try to avoid. These companies are only surviving because of their monopoly statuses. Because of momentum. It's a powerful force. It's the reason Twitter still is around. The reason Facebook is still around. But them being around doesn't mean they're good. It doesn't mean they're useful. It doesn't mean it is a good product. It doesn't mean the users like it. It just means people are used to the way things are and they aren't angry enough to leave for something else. But these companies are actively creating friction for users, daring them to leave, gouging them for everything they can. FFS Microsoft is the largest contributor (even more than Valve) to creating "the year of linux". Sure, it'll never have M$FT's market share, but it sure is eating into their revenue. We've all lost sight of what made software so powerful in the first place. Why it became so successful and changed the world. We used to ship good products that help people, make their lives better, and make lots of money in the process. Now, I think all that anyone cares about is the last part. Now we're actively being hostile to those that make the systems better. And that system is fucked up and will destroy itself. That's not a good thing, because it does a lot of damage along the way. It is a system of extreme myopia. In the last 5 years I'd argue that most software has made my life harder and more complex, not easier. There are definitely exceptions to this (ghostty being a great example), but there is a strong trend. I know I'm not alone in this feeling and I think we're getting to a point where a lot of people are no longer willing to dismiss their own gripes. This is not a good sign... I'm glad you're optimistic. I do hope things can change. And my frustration is not directed at you. I really do want you to be right and I really do want to see change come from the inside. But I do not think those leading the companies now have any foresight. To be honest, I'm not even sure there's anyone at the wheel. It feels like we've just let the market forces steer the ship. If the currents steer the ship, then there's no captain, regardless of who claims the title. Frankly, I don't want to be on a ship without a captain, but here we are. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZFTaEenaHM |
| |
| ▲ | phillipcarter 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sure it does. Users who continually push for the right features, stress test things (under normal circumstances), demonstrate uses of the platform that could be baked in by default, etc. are all highly valuable to everyone. And the social aspect matters too, even if GitHub really isn't a "social coding" site anymore. If great people doing OSS stuff are all on various GitHub projects, that encourages more good people to do good OSS stuff. | | |
| ▲ | margalabargala 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This doesn't apply to current Github issues, where rather than a lack of the "right" new features, it's just an escalating degradation of existing services that is the complaint. The attitude of "stay to support the product" can prevent a better replacement. When Digg torpedoed themselves back in 2012 or whenever, that exodus was a big part of Reddit growing from niche to dominant. | |
| ▲ | bombcar 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The only users who can push for features now are those who can somehow directly influence people working on GitHub (a small number of users) or those with massive purchasing accounts that can shake Microsoft itself to its core (governments, fortune 100 companies). I suppose us "normals" can push by making it easy to replace GitHub with something else, so that they start risking losing it all. | |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Users who continually push for the right features, stress test things (under normal circumstances), demonstrate uses of the platform that could be baked in by default, etc. are all highly valuable to everyone That's the job of GitHub's product and engineering teams, not the users. | | |
| ▲ | roastedfunction 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | To add on, GitHub has made it explicitly clear that they are both not working on features to focus on their Azure adoption and many core projects are in stasis even from community contributions. https://github.com/actions/checkout#note | |
| ▲ | phillipcarter 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | No. Products don't magically get good because people conjured up features from thin air or just copied a competitor. It is very much a two-way street, especially when the product acts as a platform that tries to support heterogeneous use cases. | | |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is not the users job. Literally. If you want that kind of feedback from users, then identify your power users and offer them contracts and money. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | jrochkind1 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I used to think people who said Github had become very unreliable were exagerating, but I can't miss it now. If you want to keep people, you have to actually go down less. It's interesting that internally you had a very different experience with Salesforce buying Heroku and Microsoft buying Github. From the outside it appears to be analagous (except github is degrading quicker than Heroku did?) | | |
| ▲ | WD-42 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Did Heroku ever actively degrade? Seems more like it was neglected until the competition eclipsed it entirely. What GitHub is doing seems worse, like true active regression. | |
| ▲ | idan 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Salesforce never understood Heroku. Salesforce's understanding of Heroku, if such an understanding ever existed, was wildly different than what Heroku understood it wanted to be. Benioff's penchant for buying himself a company every year did not help — "no headcount this year, we're buying Mulesoft/Quip/Tableau/Slack/$WHATEVER. And oops we spent too much money on dreamforce. Sucks that your pager rotations are burning people out!" It was very clear they did not give a shit about us, as evidenced by resources. It's safe to say that I'm hypersensitive to these antipatterns and have been looking out for them at GitHub, and I don't see them. What Microsoft wants GitHub to be is pretty much what GitHub wants GitHub to be. A home for all developers, playing a central role in the production of both public and private software. That alignment was never there with Heroku/Salesforce. GitHub is not perfect but I don't think it's "degraded faster" at all. It's _grown_ faster. Much much much faster. And it's had to expand into the AI field, which is not an incremental thing like "hey let's launch a new feature or better dashboards." Nobody knows what AI wants to be when it grows up. GitHub in 2026 fundamentally resembles a pre-PMF startup in many ways because of that. I'm obviously not an unbiased observer, but I wouldn't count us out just because it's an uphill. Everyone's on that same uphill. Having experienced both firsthand, I fundamentally disagree that there's a parallel. GitHub/MSFT has the median amount of corporate bullshit. Not more, not less. | | |
| ▲ | amluto 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > GitHub is not perfect but I don't think it's "degraded faster" at all. It's _grown_ faster. It’s grown in a way that degraded it and that required actual effort. For example: - The fancy new diff viewer frontend that barely works. Someone wrote that code — it didn’t happen by itself. - The unbelievably buggy and slow code review frontend (which is surely related to the diff frontend) was added complexity that did not need to happen. Its badness has nothing to do with how many users use it. It’s just bad in a no-scaling-involved way. - GitHub actions. It’s … bad. I suppose there wasn’t a predecessor that was better. > And it's had to expand into the AI field, which is not an incremental thing like "hey let's launch a new feature or better dashboards." No, it did not have to expand into the AI field. A competent AI-free GitHub Core that could have an optional AI layer on top would have worked just fine if not dramatically better than the current mess. (I say this as a paying user who will probably cancel soon. The Copilot reviews are kind of nice, but they’re not any better than a third-party system, and I’m getting sick of GitHub not working. Plus, the repos I’ve already migrated off of GitHub get to have nice non-AI things like gasp service accounts.) | | |
| ▲ | AlphaSite 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I knew a guy who worked on it tell me actions is just literally a fork from Azure Devops. Which is why it never really fit into GitHub. | |
| ▲ | kryogen1c 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > It’s grown in a way that degraded it Im an outsider and a layman, so this might be totally off base, but... The way I hear people talking about github reliability doesnt sound like scaling problems to me. If you drive 20 miles every day but then decide to drive 2000 miles and run out of gas, thats a problem of scale. If you drive 2000 miles and your engine explodes, thats a problem of design. Maybe their design problems are being made evident because of sudden scale, but they're still design problems. | |
| ▲ | ragall 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > GitHub actions. It’s … bad. I suppose there wasn’t a predecessor that was better There might not have been a predecessor, but it's been obvious for at least a decade that GHA are a very poorly designed programming language, yet nothing was done to improve. They introduced Github Apps that solve many of the issues with Actions, but that requires deploying a service and aren't anywhere near the ease of use of Actions. |
| |
| ▲ | lwhsiao 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > And it's had to expand into the AI field Maybe a hot take: no, it didn't. I think it had all the pieces (api,cli,etc.) already that it would've still be very useful in an AI world without deeply integrating AI things (copilot, etc.). I'd take higher availability over AI features any day. | |
| ▲ | ragall 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > What Microsoft wants GitHub to be is pretty much what GitHub wants GitHub to be. Yes, and what Github wants public github.com to be is free QA for Github Enterprise. My company is a paying customer with 200 engineers and it's pretty clear we're just Guinea pigs for the Enterprise product. |
|
| |
| ▲ | deaux 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > "GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better" It is a megacorp that is mainly in this situation because of its relentless pursuit of exponential growth for the benefit of a very select few to the detriment of everyone else (including GitHub employees such as yourself). The hockey sticks are there, but how they've reacted to them - which is what has lead to this situation - is entirely because of the above. If not for that, it could've reacted to them differently. It does not deserve to get better. It would be very good for society if GitHub's market share massively declined, if everyone moved away. It wouldn't be good for you personally, but it would be good for everyone else. There is nothing positive about a single company having access to everyone's code. Just look at all the tricks you've been playing, automatically opting everyone in to having their code used for LLM training. [0] GitHub shouldn't get better. It should decline in popularity. You know full well that it is undeniable that your competitors gaining market share would be good for everyone as a whole, but comp juicy and emotional attachment to people there and the pre-acquisition times where it used to be a great company (those times are not coming back) and your past with them etc. [0] https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/26/github_ai_training_po... | |
| ▲ | devin 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If anyone reading this is curious of their own, you can go to https://api.github.com/users/YOUR_USERNAME_HERE and fetch it. My ID is just over 10,000. Crazy to think of the journey that I've had in computing since I signed up for GitHub. | | |
| ▲ | psadauskas 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Fun story about that: In Ruby 2.x, the version GitHub originally launched with, every object implemented the method `id`, which returned the object id (in 3.x, it was renamed to `object_id`). Every object had this id, ActiveRecord models, strings, floats, integers, booleans, etc. Some objects had fixed object ids, like `true.object_id #=> 20`, `false.object_id #=> 0`, `123.object_id #=> 247 (2n+1)`. The `object_id` for `nil` is `4`. Yehuda Katz was the first external user of GitHub after the cofounders, so his github user id is `4`. The way Rails works, if you want to look up a user record, you do it by id: author = comment.author
user = User.find(author.id)
Now, if there was some bug, and for some reason a comment had no author, `comment.author` would return `nil`, `nil.id` would return `4`, and the UI would show Yehuda as the author in the UI. People would ask, "Who is this Yehuda guy, and why is he commenting on my PRs?" | | | |
| ▲ | rapind 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 1,202 if we're bragging. TBH I'm not super invested in github. I pay for it (smallest plan) and use it as a repository and for forking other projects occasionally, and for hosting some small-time static sites. I've never really needed any of it's other features. Every time I go to github.com there's more and more cruft though, which to me means that I'm not their target customer and they will inevitably either alienate me or jack up their prices. Happens every time there's an acquisition so I'm kind of used to it now. Github has remained surprisingly useful for quite a while post M$ purchase, but I'm old enough to know that everything M$ touches eventually goes to crap. It's like a law. I remember using CVS and Subversion though, with very limited hosted options, and I thought Github was the bees knees at the time. | | |
| ▲ | vhodges 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I am 22095 on GH but 213 on Sourceforge :-D I have a 5 digit user id on Slashdot as well (~20k mark if I recall). | | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | My Slashdot ID's under 4,000. It makes me a little sad that I can't bear to use it anymore. | | |
| ▲ | vhodges 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah, I haven't been there in years. | |
| ▲ | FireBeyond 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | My ICQ number was 5 digits. Was always funny towards "the end" when I'd give it to people and they'd wait for more digits. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | sandbags 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Surprised to find I am #79. I think that was down to being in a particular IRC channel when CW & co. were building it. | | | |
| ▲ | bratsche 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Mine is 2041. When I was working at Microsoft I got transferred over to GitHub for awhile and someone there noticed my ID and made a big deal out of me having a 4-digit ID. :) I never thought about it before then. | |
| ▲ | mreid 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Thanks for sharing that link. My GitHub ID is 484. I had no idea that I joined so early. It says I joined in 20/2/2008. I guess I was following some of the founders' work in Rails when GitHub was announced and must have signed up shortly after it got started. | |
| ▲ | hexis 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm 13936 and I felt like I was SO LATE to the party when I signed up. | | |
| ▲ | incanus77 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm 17722 and also felt late. I was a holdout on Subversion and was resistant to Git in general since SVN still worked fine and had good tooling, but eventually some client work moved to Git and thus eventually Github. | | |
| ▲ | kolanos 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | We must have joined around the same time, 17498. Funny to call us late when this would have been July 2008, or ~3 months after public launch. |
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm ~46,0000 and I thought I was early! | | |
| ▲ | Lalabadie 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm around 1M and I have a three-character username, which also feels like I was early |
| |
| ▲ | 30minAdayHN 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Hello late bloomers, 143370 here | |
| ▲ | dylanz 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 13274 here! | |
| ▲ | fud101 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I was too loyal to mercurial, only switched to git/github long after the battle was lost and won. | | |
| ▲ | dylanz 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Hah! I was too. I was at a bar with Chris trying to convince him to base the company off of hg instead of git but they already had the domain name and had already started building it. |
|
| |
| ▲ | steve_adams_86 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I was late to the party: 457,207 Created at 2010-10-27T23:42:22Z. 16 years! What a wild ride. I used to use bitbucket a ton back then. I loved it. https://api.github.com/users/steveadams | | |
| ▲ | loopdoend 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Top million though! Still earliest 1%. | |
| ▲ | 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | section_me 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm at 18 years and ID 1653. It took them a while to gain traction. | | |
| ▲ | steve_adams_86 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | They actually had meaningful competition back then, too. Bitbucket had free private repos and hg support! Back when that was still a topic. |
|
| |
| ▲ | tksb 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Genuinely surprised to be just over 10k too! Felt late! No idea how my two character handle made it through… Probably the wrong thread to ask anyone at GH to allow me to block notifications anytime anyone mentions "@ts" but I've come to accept it at this point, lol. | |
| ▲ | kemayo 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Genuinely surprised that I'm only 2,187. Weird to think about how quickly I must have jumped on it. | |
| ▲ | sikozu 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | My user id is in the 2,660,000s, 2012 here and I joined when I was 13. | |
| ▲ | idan 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | hah, my cheat here is https://github.com/YOURHANDLE.png Will redirect to an image file whose title is your user ID! :D | | | |
| ▲ | woadwarrior01 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I can't believe I joined Github back in 2009. I was a hardcore Mercurial fan and user back then. :) | |
| ▲ | godzillabrennus 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | April 27th 2010 and I felt pretty good getting a five character name (my own name). My ID is 254XXX | |
| ▲ | rossriley 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Nice, mine is 5082 | |
| ▲ | pico303 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | And here I thought I was doing well at 47979. That was January 2009, so not too bad. | |
| ▲ | larrywright 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 10126 here. I wouldn't have guessed it was that low. | |
| ▲ | microtonal 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Woah, January 2009 (in the 40,000s), like some others I felt I was late to the party. I guess not :). | |
| ▲ | burnte 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | wow, I'm in the 6.3 million group, 2014. I am surprised it's both that low and that old. Nothing compared to 5 or 6 digits, though. :D | |
| ▲ | chrisweekly 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Thanks for the link. ID: 67,498
Created: 2009-03-26 17 years, a month and two days ago. | |
| ▲ | nullstyle 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 366; nbd https://api.github.com/users/nullstyle | |
| ▲ | bsimpson 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 926648 checking in. I had just tried asking Gemini to help me get there, and it kept telling me to read line 2 of github.com, as if they were serving JSON on their homepage. :facepalm: | |
| ▲ | infogulch 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 133882 / Oct 1st 2009 | |
| ▲ | johnwheeler 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You're going to crash the server. | | |
| |
| ▲ | gwittel 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > "GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better" At a basic level I appreciate this sentiment. However, the common dysfunction I see in large corporation is its not the lack of people who give a shit. Its lacking a sufficient number of people in positions of power that give a shit -- such that they can actually make change happen. All too often competing pressures (features, profit, delivery speed, politics) take precedence; not leaving time for things that would really move the needle. In essence, too many leaders are happy to ship garbage; they don't care (or don't know). If Github were to put out a statement saying "service quality is our priority", it is fairly meaningless. If they added "here's how we'll get there", maybe it helps some. Moreso -- "from now on executive compensation is tied to these SLOs", then maybe something would actually happen. | | |
| ▲ | cogman10 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The issue is that modern software businesses aren't encouraged, in the slightest, to care about polishing products. The company leaders only care about features shipped. That's it. They only polish those features if they are shipped in such a broken fashion that they are actively causing outrage. Once the features are shipped, it's done, any additional resources on an already shipped feature is seen as wasted. This permeates all aspects of modern corporate software, unfortunately. It's why the likes of C# and .Net is forever adding new frameworks and language features while abandoning the existing frameworks. It's why Microsoft has had more new UX frameworks than OS releases. It's why for the same setting Microsoft now has multiple panels for the same information, literally a panel introduce in windows 98, Vista, 10, 11. The only time a company like MS kills a product is when that product competes in the same space as an existing product. For example, it's why they killed wordpad. It was offering features too close to what Word did for free. The fact is, it costs almost nothing to add a feature. It costs a ton of money and resources to properly integrate, use, polish, and remove places that feature fits into. I can't imagine the amount of money MS paid to integrate copilot into everything. | |
| ▲ | cm11 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think it's true that lacking sufficient numbers in power is essential for change, but I also think there is a lack of people who give a shit. I've had many 1-on-1 conversations, some lunch casual and some more directly syncing on a project, wherein we'd come to straightforward conclusions on next steps. And then we'd have full team meetings to make official decisions and I'd find myself alone asking questions about a leader's out of the blue contradicting proposals. I'm not sure how one functions in this (I guess typical?) environment. |
| |
| ▲ | CalRobert 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The avalanche has already begun. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. | |
| ▲ | pushcx 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > "GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better" What's the mechanism of action here? What changes if I stay? What changes if I give more or less of a shit? Is there javascript telemetry feeding my shit into a dashboard with a calibrated shitometer for executives to consult when they set quarterly objectives? My account is six weeks younger than mitchellh's and I've been watching GitHub fall apart for the last year, what will happen because I stick around to watch for another year? Besides that I will get covered in shit. You're an employee. What changes if you stick around? Back in October 2025, the GitHub CTO Federov prioritized moving to Azure above feature work (https://thenewstack.io/github-will-prioritize-migrating-to-a...). Yesterday he recommitted to it (https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/an-update-on-...), writing "We started executing our plan to increase GitHub’s capacity by 10X in October 2025 with a goal of substantially improving reliability and failover." GitHub has had six bad months of increasing bugs and sharply decreased uptime, and the CTO just recommitted to staying the course. You've explicitly been directed to move to Azure, not to give a shit or to make things better. So I'll defer to your direct expertise. From the outside, Heroku stalled and died because Salesforce prioritized everything else in its business above Heroku. Are GitHub's priorities so different? Does you giving a shit make Azure and Copilot the best top priorities for GitHub? Will Azure and Copilot be why I stop seeing SPA jank? Will Azure and Copilot be why I can see my list of open PRs? Will Azure and Copilot be why I see something more than the 500 unicorn? Will Azure and Copilot stop the spam PRs that want to undermine the quality of my code? Will Azure and Copilot lead to anything other than the same corporate dismissal and dysfunction that led to Heroku? Will you giving a shit matter? | |
| ▲ | zhynn 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I found out today that I am user 6082. I have been using github since the rubyconf (railsconf? I can't remember) where it was announced. I loved octocat. I was a git fanatic. It has been extremely disappointing. I am using fossil now. I kind of love it, just a sqlite file with a very trim binary to interact with it. I get all of my things that I want (wiki, forum, issues, docs, etc) all in one file. But that's just for fun. At work we are still tied to Microsoft Github. Just typing that out feels dirty. | |
| ▲ | Lammy 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > In the past few years, GitHub has absorbed both a fundamental paradigm shift (agentic coding) AND several different hockey sticks of growth. It's messy. I'm not always proud of the results or the product choices we are forced into. Excellent example of why centralization is a bad thing. A Git “hub” is not a thing that should have ever existed for a self-described “distributed” version control system. | | |
| ▲ | block_dagger 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Decentralized networks benefit from hubs if they benefit a subset of the network, which GitHub has for a long time. A hub is a focal point and there can (and should be) many of them in the git "network." | |
| ▲ | idan 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Shrug Nothing prevents usage of GH in a decentralized fashion. There's nothing magical about git remotes. Just add some more, figure out a process that works for you, have fun! In reality: when I want to send a letter I don't want to figure out a process from scratch. I want to go to the local post office, buy a stamp, and post a letter. Convenience is a spectrum and different people land in different spots. What irks me is when I lack the choice. And that's not the case here. |
| |
| ▲ | mritchie712 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | looks like you work at github. I completely understand a "people who give a shit stick around" mentality if you work there, but you can't expect users who run a business on it to stick around if it's broken. | | |
| ▲ | blanched 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don’t think they were trying to hide that - they said they’re a “hubber” at the top. Maybe not obvious, but not obfuscated. | | |
| ▲ | idan 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Correct, sorry I thought this was pretty obvious but in retrospect maybe not. I'm not encouraging Mitchell to stay, I'm saying that my version of his post is about _me_ staying to make a brighter future, and adding my context on why I still believe that. And finally I closed with "I hope we win you back" to be extra clear about it! |
|
| |
| ▲ | section_me 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As someone with the ID 1653, I've totally given up on the thing. I've even created my own rust based forge, ironically, hosted on github at the moment. | |
| ▲ | mylons 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | github hasn't absorbed agentic coding, though. agentic coding has absorbed it, and as a result it's quality is suffering. the thing about github that is so maddening is linus gave us the secret with git itself. then we reinvented centralized source control using git and called it github, and here we are. | | |
| ▲ | injidup 35 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Decentralized version control only works if there is some way to find and access those distributed repositories. For many reasons and no matter the tech there is always a drift towards having a centralized registry so that the degrees of separation for individual actors is minimised. Be that a search engine or code forge or social network. For *most* users, fully distributed and disconnected is a bug not a feature. |
| |
| ▲ | biggoodwolf 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "Stick around to make it better", exclaimed the abusive partner. | |
| ▲ | mh- 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I appreciate that you're staying inside with that mentality. Like Mitchell, GitHub was once a dream job for me, and it just never lined up pre-acquisition. I shared many of Mitchell's habits too, about GitHub being my reading material. Until some time after passing 2000 starred repos, I had literally read every line of code in each of them. GitHub still feels like home to me, as a user. Good luck, and we're all counting on you. (359439, which is quite high for this thread, it seems!) | |
| ▲ | stock_toaster 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > My version of your post reads differently:
> "GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better"
> Walking away would be easy.
Yeah, be careful not to gaslight yourself into trying to "tough it out" with bad vendor relationships. Sometimes you do need to know when things aren't good/healthy and it is time to walk away, as sticking around just ends up being needlessly flagellent.Especially with corporate owned software or SaaS ecosystems! Sounds like you made the right choice with Heroku back in the day. I feel like this is Github's Heroku moment. | |
| ▲ | spaceribs 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Considering the size and scale of Github, do you feel like it's become closer to an infrastructural public good rather than a privately owned product? The amount of impact I've seen to businesses around the US at least might as well be akin to a Covid shutdown, and that certainly has me thinking about what the overall impacts are on the US economy overall. | | |
| ▲ | idan 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Caveat, I'm not a lawyer, I don't speak for the company, yadda yadda It's a product that is _de facto_ present in nearly all developer scenarios. There are scenarios where I personally believe public management is better than private management, e.g. single-payer healthcare is strictly better than the bullshit we have in the US now. It's fundamentally cheaper for the polity when the government negotiates with healthcare providers than each private insurer. I don't think that's fundamentally the problem facing GitHub, and I don't think it would be better in any way — for anyone — if it were regulated like a utility. But again, I write javascript for a living. Take what I'm saying with a big-ass rock of salt. | |
| ▲ | somat 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | git is an infrastructural public good. github is a company that sells you git adjacent services. Speaking of git adjacent services. Why did google code end? Was it too hard for them to monetize? I tend to have an aversion for signing up for stuff so have never had an account on either, but they had a lot of momentum. And them shutting down that service feels like the inflection point marking the end of the "don't be evil" period, A lot of open source projects got burned in that one. That or when they bought YouTube instead of developing their own google video further. | | |
| ▲ | tonfa 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Why did google code end? Was it too hard for them to monetize? My guess is that abuse (people hosting files/data that google didn't/wasn't allowed to host) made it untenable for a service that wasn't generating revenue and had limited headcount. Something like Google drive or yt could spend a lot more energy stomping it rather than the handful of folks from the open source programs team. |
|
| |
| ▲ | rao-v 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As Albert Hirschman observed in reflecting on his seminal "Exit, Loyalty and Voice": "an organization needs minimal, or floor, levels of exit and voice in order to receive the necessary feedback about its performance". Don't feel too bad, you are both essential to the process that ends in Github improving (or imploding). | |
| ▲ | willio58 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The heroku mention here struck a chord for me. I don’t feel as attached to GitHub for some reason but Heroku was the first web host I used where I felt like “this is how cool a web-based tech-oriented product can be”. So crazy to see how money can ruin such a good thing. | |
| ▲ | codesnik 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | huh, I've never thought to check my github id. I don't remember myself being an early adopter. | |
| ▲ | mmooss 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Github isn't a public good or a person; it's a product for a for-profit company, whose aim is to squeeze profit out of you. They care nothing for you and will dump you the moment it's profitable. I would invest your energy in something worthwhile like an open source project, a non-profit, a social or political cause, a family memeber, etc. > Occam's razor applies here I think the simpler explanation is clearly that it's a for-profit company and these problems aren't worth fixing, and not a speculative engineering excuse. If Microsoft wanted to invest more, including in uptime, they could make it happen. They have over a trillion dollars. | | |
| ▲ | steve1977 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I fully agree with your points but have to mention that market capitalization is not money available to the company. Microsoft is valued over a trillion dollars at the stock market, Microsoft doesn't "have" a trillion dollars they can spend. |
| |
| ▲ | bbor 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What you built was a community, not a website owned by Microsoft — it could port just fine to GitLab. “I won’t leave, I’ll fight to make this place better!” is a laudable trope ofc, but in this case you’re not making any place better, you’re just defending shareholder value. IMHO :) | |
| ▲ | 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | brailsafe 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Fyi your HN description still says Heroku | | | |
| ▲ | fcoury 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Holy crap, just found out I am 1371. Wow. | | |
| ▲ | siva7 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm wondering now how the heck we ended up so early on Github. It was back then just a small unknown startup but i'm not sure what connection we first 30,000 users share. At the same time i remember there must have been also some connection to Y Combinator back in 2008. Is there a way to see my own history of probably first commits or activity on Github? Oh, i found out. It was the early Rails Community on Github. That's probably what the first Github Users all share in common. | | |
| ▲ | saint_yossarian 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That was my connection too! I joined in 2008 when I got my first Rails gig where they were using GitHub, which I hadn't heard of before. | |
| ▲ | jannyfer 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm user 7xx,xxx but I also believe I created a Github account while working on Rails projects (basically copying Ryan Bates and assembling things together. haha good times) | |
| ▲ | pimeys 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm also surprised. I'm user 34967 and I was pretty far from Silicon Valley when I joined in late 2008. | | |
| ▲ | wyclif 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Where are you finding your join number on GitHub? I just spent a few minutes looking at my profile and settings, but I don't see it anywhere. | | |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | sourcegrift 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Hi, tangential but your post mentions only two pronouns when the recent trend is to mention 3 out of respect for gender fluid people who often use slight deviations in the third pronoun as an indication of their fluidity. Hope you do better | | |
| ▲ | rmunn 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | First, a reminder of the guidelines: "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity." Second, even if your comment was not an attempt to do ideological battle: neither the comment you replied to, nor the post linked, mentioned any pronouns, so your comment makes no sense. (Well, the comment you replied to used the pronouns I, we, and you, but first- and second-person pronouns are ungendered in the English language, so if that was what you were referring to then your comment still would make no sense). Were you trying to leave this on a different message? | | |
| ▲ | sourcegrift 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for the civility. I apologise for posting it as a reply to a wrong comment indeed. |
|
| |
| ▲ | vpribish 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | fuck microsoft. it absolutely is the big badness of that monster. microsoft's sick monopoly has dragged humanity back by years from where we should be. every hour wasted, every email lost, every skilled career sacrificed to their garbage is the future lost. | |
| ▲ | ahartmetz 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You sound like you just want to make the world a better place /s | | |
| ▲ | grimgrin 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | github is their precious. i’ve heard it called that name before, though not by them /G | |
| ▲ | idan 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | shrug, I can't fix a lot of things in our reality, but I'd love to leave software development in a better state than when I found it |
|
|
|
| ▲ | DrammBA 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I can feel the frustation, nothing dramatic about expressing it This quote from the post resonated with me: > I want to get work done and it doesn't want me to get work done. I want to ship software and it doesn't want me to ship software. The sentiment is shared, and github is not the only service making me feel like that, it feels like everything on the web is more flimsy and low quality nowadays. Constant outages, bugs, UI papercuts, incomplete features, what in the world is going on? |
| |
| ▲ | realo 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Microsoft, Greed, Outsourcing to low-cost-countries who couldn't care less and rotate entire dev teams on you every few months or so, etc... No AI needed at all. Only humans. | | |
| ▲ | osigurdson 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I suspect it isn't even really "greed". It is just the slow mold growth of an org chart optimizing comfort for itself instead of value for customers. Generally, startups / founders are the only anti-bodies against this type of behavior. | | |
| ▲ | bavell 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | What a weird time for our industry. On one hand, small teams have never been able to move faster than right now. On the other, the economy and market conditions are brutal for the little guys. Incumbent behemoths hoovering up value, talent and financing. Instead of shaking things up as usual when a major paradigm shift hits, AI has mostly been a centralizing, consolidating force. Not that I was expecting it to be otherwise, but it's certainly dismaying to witness. Or am I being too pessimistic / glorifying the past? | | |
| ▲ | pocksuppet 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is not just the tech industry. It's easier than ever to make your own furniture. IKEA is bigger than ever. It's easier than ever to publish a video game. Steam is bigger than ever. It's easier than ever to 3D-print tractor parts. John Deere is bigger than ever. It's easier than ever to switch to solar power. The petroleum industry is bigger than ever. One person reverse-engineered Coca Cola, made an exact taste-alike and published the formula. You can make some at home. Coca Cola is bigger than ever. Something fundamental is wrong with the economy. | | |
| ▲ | AuthAuth an hour ago | parent [-] | | The hidden cost to competing in these industries is insane. Its so hard to build a physical product that can compete against a giant like IKEA. You need to make some with less r&d, less automation, less infrastructure and you're going to sell less units and all that needs to be price competitive against something that is made on an production line with a team of experienced engineers and sold to millions at fine margins. |
|
| |
| ▲ | a1o 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think org chart the impact is how the individual person can advance their career while doing good work. If they only get rewarded for new things, service and maintenance suffers. |
| |
| ▲ | Yajirobe 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What should we do? The only thing I can think of is to stay vocal about it. Never accept enshittification. Always point things out when they suck. | | |
| ▲ | airstrike 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not selling out, basically. Easier said than done. | |
| ▲ | nicr_22 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Focus on open protocols, simple formats over complex vendor-specific cruft. Then you can always "fork" away from an enshittified saas. I bet a small team of the quality of the kind developers who are attracted to hacking on Ghostty could recreate the subset of GitHub functionality they actually need in ~six months. It's just the problem of how to pay for the ongoing care, maintenance and hosting? Maybe another opportunity for Mitchell's particular brand of philanthropic OSS. | | |
| ▲ | twelvedogs 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | https://forgejo.org/ already exists, I suspect the issue would be hosting it at scale | | |
| ▲ | bombcar 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | DNS is the cause of all problems, but it's also the solution - just like anyone can run Apache or Nginx, so should anyone be able to run a git setup. Then it scales really well, as everyone is doing their own thing on their own domains. Of course, you lose out on some things like ease of user access and various protections. |
| |
| ▲ | pocksuppet 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
| |
| ▲ | rvz 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The harsh reality, but now it is humans using AI agents which is why we cannot have nice things. |
| |
| ▲ | munificent 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > it feels like everything on the web is more flimsy and low quality nowadays. Not just the web either. It feels like the whole world is in a race to throw shit together and cash out as quickly as possible: influencers, hustle culture, enshittification, etc. My pet theory is that all of the global chaos around the climate, politics, pandemic, etc. is leading people to no longer believe in the future. Once you lose that, all that's left to care about is the right now. No one takes the time to scrimshaw the deckrails on a ship they believe is sinking. | | |
| ▲ | bombcar 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
We can't really change the tide lest we be King Cnut - but we can at least take the time and effort in the things we do to fight against entropy - bring more order and durability into our lives.Or perhaps another adaptation: God, grant me the serenity
to accept the enshittification I cannot change
the courage to improve the things I can
and the wisdom to know the difference.
| | |
| ▲ | mmooss 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | We can; the tide changed to where it is now and can change again - and somebody will change it. People need to stop bemoaning it, and think and do something. The enshittification is an idiotic, failing, extremely short-sighted strategy. It's a huge opportunity - your competition has stopped investing in its product, fired its talent, treats its customers with utter contempt, and is managed by imbeciles. Who is a better target for disruption? Hire the talent, market your quality, treat your customers with respect, point out the BS your competition does every time they do it. Stop staring at your navel. | | |
| ▲ | bombcar 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's the whole point - it's too easy to sit around on HN and bitch about enshittification - which just is enshittification! We each have to work on our areas of quality - and when everyone starts doing that, the world changes. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | palata 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I can feel the frustation, nothing dramatic about expressing it I think the "ridiculously dramatic" part is the whole love letter to GitHub, not the frustration. And I think it is fair to say that it is ridiculously dramatic. Which is okay, of course, I'm not criticising here. Just like it would feel ridiculously dramatic (at least to me) if someone explained that they cried today when they stopped their subscription to Netflix in order to move to another service, because they love Netflix so much. | | |
| ▲ | nicr_22 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | The difference here is _creative_ work vs consumption. Craftspeople like Mitchell feel passionately about the tools they rely on to build. Github has also been a social place for builders. I don't think it's ridiculously dramatic to feel sad about great tools rusting or makerspaces closing... | | |
| ▲ | palata 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Again, I am not criticising the feeling. It's okay to feel the way we feel. I am just saying that when Mitchell mentioned it being "ridiculously dramatic", I think he was not talking about the frustration but rather about the fact that he cried about leaving GitHub. It's okay to feel sad about something and to also feel that it's ridiculously dramatic to feel sad about it. Thanks for the downvotes though. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Induane 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Way overcomplicating design is one challenge that keeps getting worse. Another gigantic unspoken issue is that people have started building tons of stuff with React on purpose for some reason. | | |
| ▲ | MatthiasPortzel 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | React gets blamed for this because the error handling is bad and the UX is confusing. But the issue with GitHub’s frontend is that the backend is dropping requests. When you click a button on GitHub and the loader gets stuck that’s because there no timeout/error handling in the JavaScript but there also no reply from the server. I feel like React is getting a bad rap because it’s visible when the issue is clearly their backend. | | |
| ▲ | regularfry 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | > React gets blamed for this because the error handling is bad and the UX is confusing Yes, it does. > React is getting a bad rap because it’s visible when the issue is clearly their backend. Two things can be bad! Except that in this case one of them is unnecessarily bad, because nobody forced them to use a front end system which defaults to terrible failure handling. |
| |
| ▲ | pc86 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is surprising to me, I would have bet money that all the people who actively engage in this type of language/framework war discourse were all drawing Social Security by now. | | |
| ▲ | 12_throw_away 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | There's a big difference between a war between two somewhat equivalent things that make different choices (editor wars, language wars, etc.) vs pointing out that certain things are really fundamentally ... not good. IMO we all need to be much louder and clearer about how bad things are, and how much better they could be. This is, in fact, on topic: github actions seemed to me like a bad idea from the start, to me, but I let my co-workers and "network effects" convince me that I was being grumpy and that it was fine, and so we've adopted it. And now ... here we are. It was exactly as bad I thought it was, and it reflected a broken engineering culture. |
|
| |
| ▲ | frevib 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Enshittification has become the winning strategy for companies. If you don’t enshittify you will lose. | | |
| ▲ | marcyb5st 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Fully agree. We really should punish companies that blatantly push this kind of mercenarism. I mean, every VP and CxO join a company, he/she takes super short-sighted decisions that push some random metric a bit up, and then they leave with a huge performance bonus not caring if everything is worse. They won't be around to cope with the fallout as they are already in another company doing the same. I am not again performance bonuses, but they should be attach to better metrics. Eg the number of happy users is still up in 3 years time. Or something like this. | | | |
| ▲ | BizarroLand 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is my darkly optimistic take on enshittification: Companies know how to make good product, but if they don't have "new and shiny" to impress us anymore, then their only alternative is to make things worse so they can heel turn and then make things "better" by unmaking all of the worse things they did. They can also milk their customers coming and going in the process. It's not "enshittify or lose", its just raw greed. Things will get better again, either that or a competitor will destroy them. Enshittification is just the current meta and a new one will come soon enough. | | |
| ▲ | pocksuppet 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think companies know how to make a good product any more. Conway's law won this battle. I think it's that company management has no incentive to do well. So they have no reason to push this down to the bottom tier of workers who actually make the products. The feedback loop is open. They make an order, the product gets worse, the line goes up, they don't know the product got worse and they have no reason to care anyway. Slop didn't start with AI. The West already forgot how to manufacture things, and we are now forgetting how to code: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47907879 | |
| ▲ | pc86 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | When is the "get better" step? I've only ever seen two things happen mid- or post-enshittification: 1. The company builds a moat and just remains shit.
2. New entrants either displace the company entirely (most likely) or competition slows the enshittification process (distant second) or reverses it (almost never).
It's not clear to me why "get shitty" is a necessary step to this. What part of GitHub's executives' grand plan is "have a barely-functional service that randomly prevents people from working"? | | |
| ▲ | BizarroLand 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | The enshittification process milks the current product of all of the money that can be wrung from it by any means just shy of immolation. Companies aren't getting cheap loans right now so they're desperate to juice their stocks so that upper management can secure their bonuses. That's why "get shitty" is necessary. When they've wrung it dry, pocketed all of the crumbs of raw cash they can get, then they'll either collapse due to overmilking their products or they'll realize that the only way to refatten the calf is to bring in new customers, so they'll unshittify it for the fresh infusion of customer money. It's a cycle, and one I predict will inevitably lead to many of these companies' collapse. |
| |
| ▲ | frevib 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > It's not "enshittify or lose" I think it’s “find natural monopoly and reduce costs (aka enshittify)”. Github is a natural monopoly and users cannot go anywhere. Unless you’re famous like Mitchell Hashimoto. | | |
| ▲ | ahartmetz 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Depends on how strong a moat really is, but it can be "enshittify and lose", too. Enlightened (as opposed to short-term) self-interest may pay off after two years or twenty, depending, and in the latter case, it may as well not pay off at all as far as a public company are concerned. | | |
| ▲ | frevib 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think Microsoft’s home game is “monopolize and enshittify”. They are the masters and know the exactly what amount of enshittification is too much. E.g. Hashimoto quitting GH is probably totally worth the 10 SREs they fired. Us plebs cannot go anywhere. | | |
| ▲ | ahartmetz an hour ago | parent [-] | | But you totally can go somewhere else? E.g GitLab (which is, unfortunately, about as slow as GitHub, but with a better license and owner) or sr.ht. If you think you need those sweet GitHub stars, I can't help you. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | cindyllm 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
| |
| ▲ | ngruhn 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's move fast and break things. | | |
| ▲ | butterlesstoast 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I can't help but think it's a bit more complicated than that. GitHub back in the day was a healthy version of "Move fast and break things". I wonder what's different. |
| |
| ▲ | psychoslave 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >The sentiment is shared, and github is not the only service making me feel like that, it feels like everything on the web is more flimsy and low quality nowadays. Constant outages, bugs, UI papercuts, incomplete features, what in the world is going on? Have you ever tried to run anything from the 80/90s era? Segfault everywhere, "fatal error was successful", kernel panic, BSOD, screen freeze for any reason and its opposite. Nothing serves better good all time than bad memory as they say. Not that the gigabit of useless crap to show essentially a few ko of text is fine, but the abuses and horrors that humans commit just shifted a bit where they land, it's not like there was a time were we had a land free of human dirty stuffs. | | |
| ▲ | DrammBA 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Have you ever tried to run anything from the 80/90s era? I take it you're agreeing with the sentiment since you had to go back 40-50 years to make your point. |
| |
| ▲ | lpcvoid 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >what in the world is going on? AI slop code | | |
| ▲ | madamelic 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I disagree. Microsoft had been doing just fine at making completely awful and broken products before AI coding was a thing. | | |
| ▲ | miyoji 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes, exactly. AI isn't some magic dust that you can sprinkle into your workforce and get more productivity and better results. It is at best a force amplifier for what you already have. If you're making awful and broken products, you will make even more awful and even more broken products at a higher rate than before. It's not a coincidence that every impressive result done using AI has come from someone with a track record of impressive results before AI. AI isn't magic. It doesn't make you good at stuff you're bad at. | |
| ▲ | bombcar 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Microsoft had a very specific niche of making completely awful software that wasn't actually broken - in fact, that was often the infuriating thing. If it just shat the bed completely, you'd have an easy argument to replace it with something else; instead, it would be technically competent (Hi, Raymond!) but covered in stuff that made it infuriating to use (Hi, Redmond!), especially if you didn't live in it day in and day out. | |
| ▲ | bmitc 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The .NET team is a counter example, aside from the GUI situation. |
| |
| ▲ | weiliddat 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think it's more people are checked out (and AI is one part of it yes), made worse by orgs who don't know how to lead/manage/change effectively. FWIW, some people used to (or still do) say similar things that software is significantly worse because people use "unserious" languages like PHP, Ruby, Python, JavaScript. It brought about so much cool shit that I don't think it's worth saying we should've stuck with only C and Java. | | |
| ▲ | nomel 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't know if it's just because I was young and bright eyed, but it seems like the "passionate nerd" is somewhat absent in modern tech orgs. Seems like, starting around 6 years ago, none of the new hires seem to give a fuck about anything anymore. That's definitely great for work life balance, and I don't think any less of them for that, but passion seems to be gone. I would be doing what I do for work if I was employed or not. That's how everyone I used to work with was. Now everyone seems to do the minimal, with the goal being more to direct blame than solving neat problems. | | |
| ▲ | weiliddat 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm still optimistic. I think the number hasn't gone down, just the ratio. Software still offers a relatively well paid and comfortable career, so you naturally get people who just want to do a good job and that's it. Nothing wrong with that. Used to be nerds hanging out on IRC, distributing Slackware, hacking trialware, modding games, etc. that had the passion and problem solving determination to do software work, which used to be harder due to lack of access to information. OTOH what a great time for a budding engineer. I'm in my mid 30s, and no longer have the same stamina and passion as in my teenage/20s, but in the last 5 years I've learnt so many things I could not have done so back in the day. I learnt and experimented way more around random topics like compilers, OS, electronics, databases because of ease of access to information, AI (:shrug:), even though I have way less free time. |
| |
| ▲ | rplnt 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Github is going around boasting how many PRs they generate a day with Copilot with very limited human input. Whether that's true or not, it might have effect. |
| |
| ▲ | ben_w 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Deeper than that, but likely also that. CV-driven development, a treadmill of features nobody needs that hurts stability we do need. | | |
| ▲ | jcgrillo 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | When did every company become a feature factory? Was tech ever not like this, or is it just how it works? It seems like they all end up this way, and it's really dumb. |
| |
| ▲ | storus 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Managers now try to "extract value" quickly, leaving ruins behind them and not caring about the future as the immediate payouts allow them to stick to the "F*k you, I got mine!" paradigm. | |
| ▲ | bombcar 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's slop from both sides, they're pretty obviously slopping their move to Azure, and at the same time being slammed with a Cambrian explosion of slop repositories. Too bad it's not reminiscent of the Hotmail purchase where they tried to move off the BSD servers and ended up with new accounts on the relatively unreliable Windows-based setup, and old accounts routed to the original BSDs. | |
| ▲ | yuvadam 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | AI slop is downstream of enshittification | | |
| |
| ▲ | OtomotO 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | (Needless) complexity is going on. KISS and you sleep better. That and the problem of forever chasing trends and never saying: "It's done" without reinventing everything every couple of years (trends again) Sounds too easy? It is of course simplified, but the core still holds true. GitHub just worked, but they had to migrate to React because "that's what everyone else uses"... Pure Enshittification. | | |
| ▲ | stabbles 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | After yesterday's outage they admitted that their elasticsearch index for issues/prs lost data. They seem to have changed the primary source of data in the issues and pull requests tabs (w/o filters applied) from the underlying database to the elasticsearch search index, which has the side effect that there's a noticeable delay between state change of an issue/pr and an update in the UI. But as seen today, these can get out of sync, and apparently they even had data loss in the index. I would really like to know their reasoning for making that change. I can totally imagine that they wanted to "simplify" so the UI uses only a single data source instead of two. As a user it's incredibly annoying to have a delay between issue/pr state changes and the search index picking it up. | | |
| ▲ | jrochkind1 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, I have been noticing weird things with Issues and PRs, including outdated state, for months now. When the outage happened yesterday I sort of figured it was something I had been noticing building up or something. |
| |
| ▲ | SoKamil 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What? React has nothing to do with current state of affairs. In fact, React on GitHub currently exists in mere islands, i.e. in Projects and recently in Pull Requests. Most of the frontend is still Web Components[1] paired with Turbo[2] for hot reloading. GitHub is still as slow even with JavaScript disabled, try it yourself. Backend just serves stuff really slow. In fact, there is an alternative GitHub frontend (no affiliation) that feels snappier and is written in React.[3] With that said, Mitchell complains about outages. These started directly after Microsoft acquisition[4] and are attributed to migration from AWS to Azure. [1] https://github.blog/engineering/architecture-optimization/ho... [2] see html source for tags [3] https://my.githero.app/ [4] https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/ | | |
| ▲ | jrochkind1 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Pull Requests is the thing that was wacky in the UI yesterday, coincidence or not? I have no idea. Yesterday we saw PR pages that displayed no error, just displayed wrong info. I would have preferred to get an error page than outdated or empty lists. I was guessing this was related to the React migration but I don't really know. | | |
| ▲ | hylaride 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Also, the browser back and forward buttons no longer work in pull requests when going between PR tabs (commits, checks, files changed, etc) as well as some other site interactions. Like, what user-hostile intention was the reasoning behind that? I am literally imagining a product manager smoking a cigar and laughing at the RUM session replays of me losing my shit. | |
| ▲ | queenkjuul 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think the backend is just fucked. I have issues with Actions and the API all the time, not just the web UI |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | teach 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Anyone who makes fun of you for feeling things probably isn't anyone you want to listen to, anyway. Thanks for being human and making ergonomic software for humans. |
|
| ▲ | NewJazz 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Spool of Wire Guy or Wiregate refers to a viral video of a man (named Dan) telling his wife (Cindy) that a spool of wire he's had for 40 years is almost at its end The spool of wire became a prominent metaphor on the app, representing something that might seem meaningless to others, but holds sentimental and nostalgic value to its owner. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/spool-of-wire-guy |
| |
| ▲ | satvikpendem 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I do recall this meme and I empathize with him and also Mitchell above. It's annoying for people to not understand your feelings or make fun of them especially if they're reflections on years past. |
|
|
| ▲ | crossroadsguy an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > tears hit my keyboard That is indeed a dangerous slip. I hope yours wasn't an Apple machine. Warranty might be an issue, because even if just one key got soiled, they will propose you should replace "practically" the entire machine (or rather make you; because well, replacing just that exact part that was damaged would be less expensive and hence less efficient and environmentally unfriendly). On the other hand, not at all ridiculous; dramatic yes. I almost felt sad when Orkut shut down. Almost. And around the time XMPP/Jabber stopped being like email when Google/Fb pulled the plug. Can't remember whether it was at the same time. I became numb to such fast and slow metamorphoses a long time ago and I feel sad about this numbness. It's a forced cynicism I'd say. These are such inane corporate events/changes and yet these are so deeply embedded in our lives. Without check and any power over them. So perpetual cynicism works. PS. I really found Ghostty to be cool (and fast!). Sadly, I reverted to stock Terminal, not because Terminal is as good, but because I no longer have/had much terminal usage (until I get back to work/coding again, and I hear things are happening in the terminal a lot more again with our world's new coding toys, LLMs, and whatnot). I also heard you on a podcast recently, and it was very interesting, and since then, I want to try Ghostty again, without even a real need for it yet. |
|
| ▲ | bayindirh 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I know this is ridiculously dramatic, but its the truth: I actually cried writing this blog post (tears hit my keyboard, I'm embarrassed to say). No, it's not. There are things we like/love in our life, and we rightfully get sad when things go bad in the camps we like, support. > I'm sure folks will make fun of me for this. It is a stupid thing. But I truly love GitHub, and I hope they find their way. I personally won't and will be angry to the people who do. Been there, done that for different things. We're human, this is normal. For finding their way, I can't be that optimistic, unfortunately. Sorry about that. |
|
| ▲ | saadn92 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Nothing stupid about caring deeply about tools that shaped your career. GitHub wasn't just a SaaS for a lot of us it was where we learned to build. The fact that you're emotional about it says more about how much you gave to that platform than anything else. Ghostty will be fine wherever it lives because people follow the project and not where it's hosted. Best of luck! |
| |
| ▲ | ssgodderidge 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | So true! This quote from the blog post really hit me: > Since then, I've opened GitHub every single day. Every day, multiple times per day, for over 18 years. Over half my life. A handful of exceptions in there (I'd love to see the data), but I can't imagine more than a week per year How could you not feel this way about a tool you willingly use this much? Perhaps if your employer is forcing you to use it, its different. But maintaining OSS? that's a labor of love. How could you not get emotional? |
|
|
| ▲ | ianpenney 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don’t know if you remember but we met at cfgmgmtcamp in 2016. https://imgur.com/a/auPVRuq We weren’t even in the same circles and this was my first good conference, but my own little company that I worked at was full of motivated hackers that were trying to wrap our heads around what you already understood. You took my comments about on-boarding and documentation very humbly and you knew what I was really saying was: keep it up. You sure did keep it up. Those same team mates are here with me using TF at a different company years later, and we’re still pushing left. Those colleagues just said “it’s art and science” … and when the art gets ripped away from you, what you described is a natural reaction. Still, keep it up. |
|
| ▲ | noir_lord 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There isn't inherently wrong with loving a tool or been sad when it it becomes something you can't love anymore, we are tool using monkeys after all - it is perhaps our defining characteristic. I'd be absolute crushed if Linux (for example) morphed into something I could not/no longer wanted to use, part of the reason I use open source wherever I can is because that is less likely to happen, Inkscape is still inkscape nearly 20 years after I started using it, so is Gimp, so is KDE, they've all changed but the essence of them is still the same (so has Linux). |
| |
| ▲ | pocksuppet 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Gnome. If you liked Gnome 2, by now you're crushed. At least you can use Mate Desktop. | | |
| ▲ | bornfreddy 8 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Well yeah, and there is KDE 3 which was awesome. But for most of the projects their point stands. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | thangalin 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I truly love GitHub, and I hope they find their way. I jumped ship as soon as they added MFA. I vibe-coded my own raw Git repository reader to help consolidate my other repos (BitBucket, GitLab), which inevitably started to impose more restrictions (disk space, MFA), as well. It's no GitHub, but works, doesn't cache, and is pure PHP. https://repo.autonoma.ca/repo/treetrek |
|
| ▲ | munificent 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Nobody should cry over a SaaS, of all things. We don't cry over things, we cry over what things mean. I don't see anything wrong with grieving the loss of a community and environment that led to so many meaningful experiences for you. |
|
| ▲ | Nate75Sanders 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Completely understand the work/life/hobby fusion. And I think that you and GitHub went through the stages of life together. They probably weren't exactly parallel, but I bet you measure and remember your life through GitHub's life to some degree, along with the projects you had there. There's no question that with your drive and acumen that you could build the GitHub that you both had and want. It might be your next chapter. |
|
| ▲ | denysvitali 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Nobody should cry over a SaaS This is more than a SaaS, for you and the others. Stating kind of the obvious: without it Vagrant, Terraform and heck, even Hashicorp would have not been the same - or probably even existed. Despite probably being a later user of GitHub I share the same feelings. It's so sad to see GitHub, a product and company I once respected a lot, getting trashed by Microsoft and all of these outages. |
|
| ▲ | ozim 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I wasn’t that invested in StackOverflow but still I was quite invested there. I do feel kind of sadness right now it is a zombie that current owners are just pumping out whatever is left out of it. I don’t care about GH I felt centralized repositories like that is wrong. Q/A was supposed to be centralized because we need people to find the questions and answers in a single place. GH or others should be just referring to repositories not keep them… be a search engine for decentralized repositories. |
|
| ▲ | aforwardslash 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We all understand that. We had some piece of software we still cling on to it (in my case is a copy of paint shop pro 5, corel draw 7 and Delphi 7), despite being completely obsoleted or assassinated by "big industry". I could add CoolEdit 2000 to it, but havent really opened it in a decade. To be honest, I never understood the fascination with github. Its a hub, of git repos. Not to piss on your parade, because your complaints are valid, but maybe isnt github that as gone sour as much as you have grown out of it. This was your passion, now its over and you move on. |
|
| ▲ | flaburgan 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I feel you mate. When people were scrolling Facebook, I was scrolling github, being so excited to see so many people building things together. Commits popping up in my stream were making me feel we were improving the world, bit by bit. It was an happy stream, compared to the depressing stream of Facebook.
And then Microsoft bought github. And I knew it would only be a matter of time before it would fell down. It also made little sense to build all our beloved open source projects in the living room of the entity who was so harmful to our community for years.
So I left github and joined several gitlabs. But I never found back this central steam of "look at open source being made in real time". We need a decentralized gitlab with ActivityPub. |
|
| ▲ | klaussilveira 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't think it is dramatic. I felt a similar sadness around this subject. It's the meaning behind it: the hacker spirit, the naive curiosity, the juveline freedom, being destroyed by the corporate machine. It is a small metaphor that hits all of us in different spots. And boy, does it hurt. |
|
| ▲ | listless 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I felt pangs of emotion reading the post so it’s definitely not just you. I think because GitHub has been such an important part of my life dating back to the very start of my career - just like you. And it’s not just the technology, it’s the people. All the great projects there. The countless README’s I’ve dissected trying to setup something new. There’s people behind all of that and that always felt exceptionally meaningful to me. It has been profoundly emotional to watch GitHub degrade over the past year. It’s almost like watching someone you love slip away. Which I have also done. It’s not the same, but there is something familiar in the pain. Meanwhile streamers dunk on it in YouTube videos and on X and none of it is funny to me. It’s just tragic. Now I’m choked up. Dammit all to hell. |
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | idebug 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm sure others have probably said this, but I'll say it anyways. Give Gitea a try. This is what I do. I self-host all my projects and mirror them to Github if they are public projects. And I have distributed Gitea runners across my various servers and they just work and my pipelines never fail me. I'd also highly recommend GitLab CE for similar reasons. But, if you really don't want to self-host, GitLab proper is also awesome and way better than GitHub IMO. |
|
| ▲ | steve_adams_86 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I find the decline of these things upsetting too. I don't know if it slots into enshittification specifically, but there's a phenomenon of decline in general that's so antithetical to where my career began and what I thought was possible. I want to believe we can do better, and ideals can still matter in software. And I mean, they clearly can; your own contributions are proof of that. We can all do better and the decline isn't a prescription we all need to follow. Regardless, it's tough to watch. Github used to be such an exciting and promising platform. |
|
| ▲ | ok_dad 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think people today think that compartmentalization is easy but sometimes in life your work and personal life and everything else gets all mixed up and you get situations where others might call it unhealthy but for you, it’s fine ante it’s how you want to live your life. That’s just to say that crying over GitHub is fine, you’re a human, we cry over all sorts of stuff. Emotions are weird and you should not feel badly for having them. |
|
| ▲ | napolux 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| we can be ai-powered, we can be engineers. but most of all we’re humans :) happy to see that some humans can still feel emotions, real emotions, and not be ashamed by them. |
|
| ▲ | 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | rtaylorgarlock 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Wow, thanks for your honesty here. I'm commenting primarily to commend your decision-making which I couch in empathetic understanding.
I saw your post and immediately thought, "good, surprised it took {any organization leaving github} this long." I don't hate big M nor the 'github ecosystem' (except maybe github actions, which seems to get 10x the attention it deserves); the challenge is I perceive far better solutions to be chosen which would serve the open source world if we simply deploy a slight increase in cognitive energy. |
|
| ▲ | pdimitar 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Whoever makes fun of you over it is exactly the people you want to avoid. Leaving any emotions aside, all the arguments you gave are technical and carry weight: we are not always in the mood for OSS work -- or even have the time and energy, which happens to be the much more oft limitation -- and when we are, we want our infra to just work. If it does not, that might kill your motivation for a week. Or a month. For an OSS contributor, the main one even, this is actually bad news. You are doing both yourself and your community a big service by making this difficult decision. Not everyone can do it. Respect. |
|
| ▲ | dantihanyi 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's a fair writeup and your thoughts are valid. Businesses have to continue to re-earn customer trust each year - especially when it's mission critical and they expect recurring revenue. I hope they find their way too. If you're still considering vendors, I think you'll find some of the keep it simple ethos can still be found among OSS friendly vendors -- Codeberg, etc. Good quality & uptime doesn't have to be expensive - just grounded by people that care enough to reject the scope creep and focus on doing one thing well. |
|
| ▲ | anildash 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's good to care about these choices. There are also lots of ethical reasons to leave GitHub, and this makes it easier for people to choose to leave on those grounds, too. Every time people talk about their decisions and normalize anything that's not just having a monoculture where there are no competitive markets and monopolists control entire ecosystems, that's a good thing. |
|
| ▲ | 0x0000000 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I have an unhealthy relationship with it. You really, really do. Please, for your own benefit, take a step back and touch grass, literally. There is so much more to this world than Github of all things. > Every day, multiple times per day, for over 18 years... During my honeymoon while my wife is still asleep? Yeah, GitHub This is addiction |
|
| ▲ | flowardnut 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| "Lately, I've been very publicly critical of GitHub. I've been mean about it. I've been angry about it. I've hurt people's feelings. I've been lashing out. Because GitHub is failing me, every single day, and it is personal. It is irrationally personal. I love GitHub more than a person should love a thing, and I'm mad at it. I'm sorry about the hurt feelings to the people working on it." Same :( their 9 5's is embarassing |
|
| ▲ | linsomniac 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Dramatic or not, it needed to be said and I appreciate you saying it. Nobody would listen if I said it. ;-) |
|
| ▲ | justinator 26 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Bruh you're exceedingly wealthy, you'll get through this. |
|
| ▲ | Dinux 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No man, I'm with you. I remember when GitHub was a joy to use. Finding new niche tools and projects written by people who actually cared about their work. Needed some simple postgres backup script? Browser GitHub and plenty of people put time and effort in creating something that actually worked. I was talking about the same thing just yesterday. GitHub with its friendly mascot is no longer. It's now just another SaaS platform that everyone including my non technical colleagues are using. Their push towards everything-AI is the exact opposite of what they stood for in the begining. A community of like minded people who wanted to build great tools and loved software. But yet no longer. GitHub now feels like a soulless SaaS that's trying to hook my onto an enterprise subscription and bring my whole team along so we can all do some agentic coding or whatever. |
|
| ▲ | piker 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Do you think this is endemic to large software organizations today, or are our needs (and the corresponding complexity) just outstripping the ability of old business models to address it? |
|
| ▲ | fourside 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| People who reach outlier-level success in a field tend to have strong opinions and an emotional connection to said field. It’s probably a non-trivial part of why they are so successful. |
|
| ▲ | ziml77 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You feel how you feel and that's totally fine. |
|
| ▲ | jadbox 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What OSS friendly platform will you be moving to? |
|
| ▲ | koolala 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| God would cry too if they saw the world they created. Let the salty tears flow |
| |
| ▲ | jenadine 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | So far everything is going according to the plan. Humans are really close to make the AI that will replace them and enter into the next phase of the plan. Or do you have a better idea of what the plan exactly is? | | |
| ▲ | koolala 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You mean the AI that might fail and suck every last ounce of entropy or life out the planet and sufficate it? Have you seen the insane amount of natural gas being burned to power it? Obviously I'd love if AI solved its own energy crisis but that hasn't even begun to happen yet. You think it will invent cold fusion? Room temp super conductors? Solar cells past our theoretical limits? Do you realize it's literally being controlled by human greed? | | |
| ▲ | koolala 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It isn't just greed controlling it too, so I'm also optimistic. I'd just also like seeing the light powering it at the beginning of the tunnel. | |
| ▲ | pocksuppet 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's not going to do any of these things, because it's auto-complete. No, it won't bypass P≠NP either. | | |
| ▲ | koolala 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | What about P vs. NP? Is auto-complete able to create P solutions and then perform NP verification by interacting with experiment or calculation IO? Couldn't it test solutions faster than a human on problems with massive solution spaces like folding proteins or aligning electron-hole pairs? |
|
| |
| ▲ | keybored 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What’s the next phase? Billionaires manage to seize the means of bunker protection and remote-control the commoners into the wilderness? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Zenbit_UX 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Forgive me if you’re not in a solutioning phase right now … but how motivated are you to fix this? I’m a big fan of ghostty and also unenamoured with the current state of GitHub and Microsoft. That is to say I believe this is an opportunity to disrupt the incumbent player and I’m game. HMU if you feel similar and want to discuss. |
|
| ▲ | dismalaf 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| GitHub died when MS bought it. It was great back in the day, it shaped a lot of modern day FOSS culture but now it's just MS. |
|
| ▲ | bavell 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In a reductive sense, yeah it's a bit silly. But zooming out, I can understand. Sucks to have your hand forced. Sucks to be let down. Sucks to watch something that was great fall from grace. Thanks for Ghostty, been my daily driver for awhile now. Hope the rest of your day/week goes much better! |
|
| ▲ | bittlesnet 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Bud. Right decision. Time is a forward moving arrow. You gotta do what's right for the project and over the years I've rarely seen your decisions going against the stream. |
|
| ▲ | bfivyvysj an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Is this you moving a git repo to another git hosting service? |
|
| ▲ | 999900000999 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I feel this way, although less emotional, with Unity. Unity taught me how to program and , along with JavaScript turned me from a college dropout to a software engineer. Finished my degree later. I still love Unity, but the company is stable. If I friend needs help with a Unity project, I'm down, but I start all my new games with Godot. I'm not sad though. Unity is like a friend I'm still cool with, we just drifted apart. But from a realistic point of view. Did we really think Unity and GitHub were charities in pursuit of the greater good. Of course not. They cashed out, made money and whatever good they did along the way was a nice side effect. |
|
| ▲ | aucisson_masque 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't know why but I don't want to make fun of you. Just sad you can't enjoy it anymore. |
|
| ▲ | johnbarron 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This post reminds me of Linus video on Git, calling Subversion the most stupid project because it was.... Centralized. ;-) "Tech Talk: Linus Torvalds on git" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 "I'm not going to force you to switch over to decentralized, I'm just going to call you ugly and stupid. That's the deal." |
|
| ▲ | singingtoday 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| hug Thank you for your hard work. |
|
| ▲ | WesolyKubeczek 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If you choose something self-hostable (whether hosted commercially for you or no is of no relevance), I'm very interested to hear about it. |
|
| ▲ | deadfall23 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Hey bud, thanks for the honesty and I feel your pain! You're an incredible engineer and I've looked up to you (even though we are the same age) since hanging out at Kiip. Our tools should be getting better not worse. Hopefully your influence can be a canary in the coal mine to make some real change to reliability. -D |
|
| ▲ | Imustaskforhelp 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Its given me so much and I'm so thankful for it. But, it's not what it used to be. I don't know. Mitchell, when I was in 10th grade and had to pick my streams which led me to pick comp-sci/stem rather than finance (I am going to college soon), I thought of my dream life and it was being on a vacation/beach using Linux or terminals and opening github and contributing to open source software. I simply couldn't imagine my life without terminal (funny because ghostty is the terminal that I use) You said that you have been with Github for 18 years, that is longer than the time I have been on earth. You were (and in some sense are!) living my dream life in that sense and github fulfilled its role, it had helped you until recently when it has started to get worse and worse. my point is you have an special bond with github and for good reason,so to remove an somewhat integral part of all of this (github) after so long will have emotional feelings and outbursts. I hope that you are doing fine, Ghostty/your-work has a positive impact on my life and gives a hope by being a relaible tool I rely on, I wish nothing but the best for Ghostty and you personally. |
|
| ▲ | rvz 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Damn GitHub is at a new low. I wish GitHub wasn't overtaken by the AI agents and hoped that the situation would improve. But it just didn't and ever since Microsoft took it over, it was just run into the ground. I thought that GitHub was so unreliable that it would be better to self host instead of use the service [0]. It turns out that 6 years later, that was the case and it doesn't sound crazy anymore. The problem is GitHub was neglected and the AI agents ran it into the ground and we need to now self host. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 |
|
| ▲ | theideaofcoffee 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Github won't shed a single tear in return, hell, they probably didn't even know until this came out. And not to sound harsh, but they probably don't care either. If they don't 'find their way', then there are 10 different competitors ready to take over, and I hope some of them do. Better for the ecosystem to have a strong element of competition. Perhaps their time as top dog is ending, and it's only natural, nothing lasts forever, especially in tech. |
|
| ▲ | rajangdavis 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Throwing out this idea, but would you ever consider making your own version of Github? |
|
| ▲ | xyst 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| the acquisition by microslop was the death knell for gh. |
|
| ▲ | _doctor_love 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I know this is ridiculously dramatic, but its the truth: I actually cried writing this blog post (tears hit my keyboard, I'm embarrassed to say). > I'm sure folks will make fun of me for this. It is a stupid thing. Brother, it is not a stupid thing. We need more in the world of what you are doing here. Never change on this count. |
|
| ▲ | DetroitThrow 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's not a stupid thing - GitHub not being serious about basic reliability is, at this point, a big risk to people depending on it for change management, much less OSS projects needing it to do every aspect of work in the public. GitHub made working in the open a joy. It's very sad the state that it's in. |
|
| ▲ | esafak 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > GitHub only gets better if people who give a shit stick around to make it better Quote the opposite. We need to leave so they receive the message in order to fix it. As far as the suits know, life is swell. So much so they can't keep up with demand. Be sure to say why you are leaving too, so they know what to fix. |
|
| ▲ | heliumtera 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| No serious person would make fun of this emotional reaction. It seems technology had something going on, and it quickly got flooded by incompetence and greed. We have all been deeply involved, constructed careers and sharpened our tools with technology and hopefully for the benefit of technology.
I can only imagine how deeply sad the current state of software is for those talented individuals that helped to carry it to here. Some of us can at least hide it with cynicism because there is not much at stake, but emotional honesty is very much appreciated. |
|
| ▲ | aapoalas 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| "They're your feelings and no one else has the right to how you should feel about them." |
|
| ▲ | subhobroto 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You have been a tremendous influence on my professional life. Vagrant made VMs easy to use. You were very gentle with my Vagrant PRs. We disagreed a bit and I migrated some of those rejected Vagrant PRs into VeeWee. Then Hashicorp happened and I was over the moon. (Full transparency - not everything was perfect, I lost 50% of my Hashicorp equity which hurt real bad but that's not your fault, just saying there were ups and downs!) This is all to say I have tremendous respect for you. Which is why I say: You also have the resources to fix this. You not only have the resources and skill Mitchell, to make it happen - You know everything that it takes to be the CEO of a Billion dollar unicorn - you have the connections, you have the vision. More importantly, Mitchell, you care. Make it happen. You have done it a few times before. Do it again. |
|
| ▲ | devy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [dead] |
|
| ▲ | fatata123 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [dead] |
|
| ▲ | oulipo2 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Tools can be frustrating. We can get emotional with tools we appreciate and we grew up with. But we should also learn to not focus solely on work efficiency. As you say yourself, this is unhealthy. You've labeled it, now work on fixing that unhealthy relationship with work, and with that tool. Nobody should be in an emotional turmoil because they can't do a PR in a 2h window during a day. We should all learn to take things more slowly, because our current accelerationist society is detroying the planet, and is destroying social ties. Because, if you get that emotional from on a non-functioning tool... wait until you discover how our non-functioning democracies allowed for a genocide to happen in Gaza, for people in the south to be doing slave-work for our AIs to satifsy people in the north, etc |
|
| ▲ | bagxrvxpepzn 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > I actually cried writing this blog post (tears hit my keyboard, I'm embarrassed to say). If this is the truth, this is not normal. I'm not saying that in a judgmental way but from a place of good intention. You might want to check out your testosterone levels. |
| |
| ▲ | motoxpro 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is not good intentioned, you're a jerk, and it's 100% fine (and healthy) to care about things in life. | | |
| ▲ | bagxrvxpepzn 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | > This is not good intentioned On what are you basing that? > it's 100% fine (and healthy) to care about things in life. Yes it is and I didn't claim it wasn't, so this is a strawman. There's nothing personally indicting about having low testosterone. It's relatively common and it's potentially a serious medical condition. There is no reason to take offense from this. | | |
| ▲ | motoxpro 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Becuase you're associating their reaction to "a serious medical condition" because it is "not normal." I wanted to add a counter to that and say they are very normal and support them rather than suggest they go to the doctor. My assessment of your intentions was wrong, as I can't know that, but I stand by the other two statements. | | |
| ▲ | bagxrvxpepzn 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > I wanted to add a counter to that and say they are very normal and support them rather than suggest they go to the doctor. I don't see a reason to counter anything I said. I offered neutral information that may help the OP. If the OP's testosterone levels are indeed low due to a serious medical condition, then you've just done them a major disservice. Even if you're of the opinion that it's normal, it's reasonable for someone else to assess that feeling sadness to the degree of provoking tears in response to deciding not to use productivity software is a cause for concern. | | |
| ▲ | motoxpro 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I appreciate the sentiment. The point I was making in my initial reply was in response to the trivialization of what someone else cares about ("sad enough to cry over productivity software"). That to me is by definition judgmental. I don't believe there is a universal list of things that is OK to care deeply enough to cry about.
There are plenty of things you would cry about that I would not, but I can understand why you would care deeply about those things. Or maybe you are of the opinion that crying isn't allowed at all. Which is also an opinion. | | |
| ▲ | bagxrvxpepzn 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > That to me is by definition judgmental. My use of "judgmental" was to communicate that my intention was not to pass judgment on his worth as a person or his worthiness of respect as a person or professional in me providing honest feedback about his behavior. > I don't believe there is a universal list of things that is OK to care deeply enough to cry about. It's not about prescribing when it's OK to cry or trivializing what he's sad about, it's about deviations from average behavior. The vast majority of emotionally well-adjusted men usually only cry at the death of a loved one or during a divorce or serious break-up. Here's data on that: https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/51961-the-who-what-where-w... To find yourself crying in a situation different from those situations should raise a red flag. Yes it may be the case that it's not a sign of anything serious but given the rarity of the situation, it's reasonable to suspect there may be something else at play, e.g. low testosterone. | | |
| ▲ | motoxpro 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Men must be going through a lot of breakups and deaths! 26% have cried in the last week 39% have cried in the last month 64% have cried in the last year |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Rapzid 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Becuase you're associating their reaction to "a serious medical condition" because it is "not normal." Weak man argument. They said low T is "potentially" a serious condition. |
|
|
|
|