Check out www.appear.in !

I can't prescribe what others use.

jlinkels

At first I was a bit shocked at how much MS was willing to plunk down for GitHub, wondering how they would or could ever recoup that investment, let alone make a profit. Now that is actually compounded by reading the vast number of Microsoft stock shares that accompany the deal. A few top officials at GitHub will own blocks of stock in Microsoft second only to Billy himself! I've also read that MS hopes to recoup some good will after Ballmer and the Boys burned so much down, but $7,500,000,000.00 worth? Oh yeah I am keeping my eyes on the development in this arena.

If you want to see the latest news on this here is an interview w/ Ballmer's successor and an outline of the incredible stock options that was part of the deal. The url was long so I ran it through TinyURL but it links to a Bloomberg page and is harmless.

https://tinyurl.com/ycazknam

Whats a penguin cost?
what are you all worried about it is intellectual property. Grow up The head of M$ knows you are unable to herd cats. So play with them. fork it have fun.

Just FTR I am not worried about MS putting a lockdown on Open Source but I am some concerned with "herding" of large numbers of software programmers but most importantly what is as of yet unknown. Just the fact that MS spent 7.5 Billion Dollars and LOTS of stock on GitHub and with factoring in MS's and most large corporations machinations, it should be obvious that they plan this as an investment, one in which they expect a handsome return which historically has meant the ruination if not complete destruction of "the competition". I'm not freaking out but I am "sleeping with one eye open". It may take 5 years to coalesce, but I can't imagine the results will be insignificant let alone a joy for all. MS plays hardball, with a poker face and is not above throwing "bean balls" and sliding in spikes high, while paying off the umpire... if you get my drift.

Maybe Microsoft did not understand that they could download and use the software for free anyway. And that even buying Github does not lift the obligation to respect the GPL et al.

Seriously, FOSS might loose a good and coherent publication platform if MS makes it unpleasant to continue using it. But they never, ever, are able get the software into their hands and out of the community. It is like trying to put water in a basket. To the software published on Github they can do exactly as little or as much as last week before they acquired it.

They can make it unpleasant or undesirable though for developers to publish on Github. And that is bad. I assume Github itself is all composed out of FOSS, you theoretically everyone can recreate a new Github. Which is exactly the undesired effect, because we will have dozens of Githubs and alike in different flavors scattered over the Internet. And it might take years to reconcile into something authoritative like Github is now.

jlinkels

i love how various sites now have a large and prominent "Migrate from github" button!
very large: https://bitbucket.org/
not so large, but right at the top: https://gitlab.com/

Now that's funny!

No-one trusts M$...

hehehe

It's not. But then, neither is LQ...

^ important detail.
gitlab - the software, not the site - is all FOSS afaiu, and can be deployed on other servers, e.g. https://framagit.org/

IMO they want to/are trying to control Linux/open source from within, not necessarily "take it over" but control its direction. Which also means that they will take that control away from RedHat as they are usually steering the direction. Never thought I would side with RedHat but damn if I would side with Microsoft. They've burned too many bridges for me to see them differently.

It looks like you are responding to my post, I was talking about GitHub, not GitLab.

GitLab is not completely FOSS, it's "Open Core", which means they offer proprietary extra features. Better than GitHub though, which is completely proprietary.

^ oh yes, i did that on purpose - comparing github to gitlab.
i should've made it clearer.

are you sure you're refering to gitlab the software, and not gitlab.com the site?

Ah ok, I had misunderstood you then.

Yes, see https://about.gitlab.com/upgrade/

and https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab...master/LICENSE for the full details. Although looking at the details now, it looks like you can get/read the source anyway, but somehow the license key is needed to make it operate. It's not entirely clear to me how they accomplish that, from a technical perspective.

^ i see.
so that only applies to the enterprise edition?
afaics, the community edition is fully opensource: https://about.gitlab.com/installation/ and https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/install/installation.html

here's another alternative:
https://notabug.org/