←back to thread

Mozilla Firefox – Official GitHub repo

(github.com)
848 points thefilmore | 2 comments | 13 May 25 05:23 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
bandrami ◴[13 May 25 06:03 UTC] No.43969975[source]▶
Pretty cool that Linus Torvalds invented a completely distributed version control system and 20 years later we all use it to store our code in a single place.
replies(29): >>43969999 #>>43970002 #>>43970008 #>>43970018 #>>43970019 #>>43970028 #>>43970031 #>>43970032 #>>43970036 #>>43970037 #>>43970142 #>>43970154 #>>43970198 #>>43970282 #>>43970314 #>>43970343 #>>43970418 #>>43970419 #>>43970431 #>>43970434 #>>43970451 #>>43970472 #>>43970541 #>>43970904 #>>43971268 #>>43971299 #>>43971387 #>>43971586 #>>43988717 #
SCdF ◴[13 May 25 06:11 UTC] No.43970018[source]▶
I get what you're saying, but tbf hosting on github doesn't (yet!) box you out of just moving back to that system. It's still just git. It's still distributed, in the sense that if github goes down you could still generate patches and email them around, and then push back to github when it's back.

Everything surrounding code: issues, CICD, etc, is obviously another story. But it's not a story that is answered by distributed git either. (though I would love a good issue tracking system that is done entirely inside git)

replies(9): >>43970039 #>>43970120 #>>43970143 #>>43970151 #>>43970180 #>>43970299 #>>43970301 #>>43970480 #>>43970514 #
littlestymaar ◴[13 May 25 06:16 UTC] No.43970039[source]▶
> Everything surrounding code: issues, CICD, etc, is obviously another story

That's what Github is though, it's not about the code itself it's about all your project management being on Github, and once you move it, moving out isn't realistic.

replies(6): >>43970041 #>>43970050 #>>43970059 #>>43970073 #>>43970450 #>>43970597 #
enos_feedler ◴[13 May 25 06:18 UTC] No.43970050[source]▶
And how are we suppose to solve this problem? By creating distributed versions of every possible component of every piece of software? Seems unrealistic. I think we should be grateful that the core underlying protocol for the most important data has the distributed properties we want. It's a lot more than we can say vs. lots of other platforms out there.
replies(3): >>43970087 #>>43970202 #>>43971124 #
1. int_19h ◴[13 May 25 09:27 UTC] No.43971124{3}[source]▶
By storing issues etc in the repo itself. A git repo is just a generic object graph, after all, and objects don't necessarily describe files.

There are several such solutions already. The problem is that neither of them is popular enough to become a de facto standard. And, of course, centralized git providers like GitHub have a vested interest in keeping in this way, so they are unlikely to support any such solution even if it does become popular enough.

replies(1): >>43978369 #
2. enos_feedler ◴[13 May 25 22:16 UTC] No.43978369[source]▶
Wouldn’t it make economic sense for a git host to emerge that just did things this way and collect big pay for it? Gits been around forever and you’re idea sounds simple enough that a market of people would probably choose it on principle. There must be something more fundamental at play here.