←back to thread

Gitlab has introduced a five-user limit for free groups

(docs.gitlab.com)
160 points MattIPv4 | 4 comments | 20 Jun 23 17:14 UTC | HN request time: 1.037s | source
Show context
mirzap ◴[20 Jun 23 17:38 UTC] No.36407575[source]▶
I'm incredibly pleased about Microsoft's acquisition of Github, as I notice visible improvements every passing month. Considering Gitlab's pricing, I wonder why anyone would abandon GitHub Team or Enterprise plan in favor of Gitlab. Gitlab's costs are exorbitant, and they resemble Atlassian products, with an overwhelming number of features that are rarely used, cluttering the interface and diminishing the overall user experience.
replies(9): >>36407665 #>>36407684 #>>36407774 #>>36407852 #>>36408104 #>>36408109 #>>36408163 #>>36408243 #>>36408338 #
jacquesm ◴[20 Jun 23 17:46 UTC] No.36407684[source]▶
I'm not. The biggest enemy of Linux/FOSS should never have been in charge of the biggest repository of open source software.
replies(3): >>36407736 #>>36407846 #>>36407868 #
EduardoBautista ◴[20 Jun 23 17:53 UTC] No.36407846[source]▶
Microsoft earns a significant amount of money from hosting Linux servers and even makes contributions to the kernel.

How are they an enemy?

replies(1): >>36407893 #
orangepurple ◴[20 Jun 23 17:56 UTC] No.36407893[source]▶
https://web.archive.org/web/20050922005808/http://news.zdnet...

https://web.archive.org/web/20180523190053/https://www.econo...

replies(1): >>36411029 #
arp242 ◴[20 Jun 23 21:37 UTC] No.36411029[source]▶
This is more than 20 years old...
replies(1): >>36411537 #
jacquesm ◴[20 Jun 23 22:23 UTC] No.36411537[source]▶
So is Microsoft. And everybody that is currently controlling the company was there when this happened.
replies(1): >>36411575 #
1. arp242 ◴[20 Jun 23 22:27 UTC] No.36411575[source]▶
And? Are they still doing this kind of stuff or not? If they are, then it would be easy to come up with more recent examples.
replies(1): >>36415385 #
2. jacquesm ◴[21 Jun 23 07:14 UTC] No.36415385[source]▶
Yes, they are still doing this kind of stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft

What surprises me is that the tech crowd is so ready to bend over for one of the worst companies on the planet in the software domain. These are the very same people that abused the legal system in every way that they could in order to slow down the adoption rate of open source. They are still doing this today but quietly, for instance by incentivizing municipalities and other government layers to use their software (for free if necessary) just to stop adoption of equivalent open source solutions.

replies(1): >>36415601 #
3. arp242 ◴[21 Jun 23 07:42 UTC] No.36415601[source]▶
> Yes, they are still doing this kind of stuff.

What specifically?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but linking to a lengthy Wikipedia page is not an argument. From a quick glance a number are old, and a number are just non-issues (e.g. "Mono patent concerns", which was just some baseless FUD mentioned by Stallman once almost 15 years ago), but I didn't read the entire page. "Incentivizing municipalities and other government layers to use their software" could just be normal business practice (or something shady – much depends on the details).

replies(1): >>36418126 #
4. jacquesm ◴[21 Jun 23 13:23 UTC] No.36418126{3}[source]▶
One recent example would be to trample all over the rights of the open source contributors to github hosted repositories by using their code to incorporate it into Copilot, irrespective of the licensing details. I'm sure that counts for nothing in your book but for me taking open source and using it without attribution shows that MS hasn't changed one bit, they simply see FOSS as another resource to be monetized.

As far as incentivizing municipalities is concerned, they are currently in the docket for anti-trust violations just like they were in the past. Historically MS would swoop in on any governmental org in Europe that would successfully implement FOSS solutions instead of MS based stuff. Not to make money, but just to maintain dominance, another anti-trust play. And they never stopped doing that.