[ale] github

[Steve Litt]

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:14:25 -0400
Leam Hall via Ale <ale at ale.org> wrote:

> I'm still on the fence on this. Yes, GitHub has the right to sell to
> MS, and it's a business. Sell to the highest bidder.

They absolutely have a right to sell to the highest bidder, regardless
of the damage you can expect that bidder to do. And we have the right
to vote with our pocketbooks and feet, and go elsewhere, because any
time Microsoft *can* do harm, they *do* do harm.

And Solomon said it best: Why rely on someone else to host your
project's source code, just because they don't directly charge you
money? Why not host your own. We could even start a co-op advertising
each others' personally run repos, to get the visibility we lose from
walking away from GitHub. 

> 
> The issue of version control is less of an issue for me. That is, yes 
> it's an issue but you can run git locally. I liked GitHub because I 
> could collaborate with others on code 

Still can, in many ways. If there are just a few others, a few ssh keys
do the job.

> and point to my repositories as 
> part of my resume. 

You can do that with your personal repos whose git server serves them
up read-only on the web.

> Of course, there was the "have a current copy 
> off-site" thing as well.

I back up to a backup server, and maybe six times a year burn a backup
on the backup server to Blu-Ray, and put the Blu-Ray in a safe deposit
box. And with something as un-secretive as your Git repos, you could
just have a trusted buddy across the country allow you in via your
public ssh key, and after he git-clones you, you can keep pushing the
latest and greatest to his backup git.
 
SteveT

Steve Litt 
June 2018 featured book: Twenty Eight Tales of Troubleshooting
http://www.troubleshooters.com/28