Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #110841 > unrolled thread

Were is a great place to Share your finished projects?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Natsu Dragneel <srentzsch10@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 05:48 -0700
    Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-06-30 15:09 +0200
      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2016-06-30 15:03 +0100
      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 16:06 -0700
        Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 09:13 +1000
        Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-06-30 19:16 -0400
          Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-07-01 07:53 +0200
      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-07-01 11:14 +1000
      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-07-01 11:38 +1000
        Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-07-01 07:41 +0200
          Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-07-13 11:28 +1000
          Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 13:39 +1000
          Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-07-13 14:42 +1000
          Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 15:11 +1000
            Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-07-13 16:44 +1000
              Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 17:00 +1000
                Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-07-13 18:49 +1000
                  Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 19:20 +1000
              Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 22:07 -0600
                Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-13 21:49 -0700
                Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? hasan.diwan@gmail.com - 2016-07-14 12:04 -0700
                  Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2016-07-14 15:34 -0400
                  Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 16:04 -0700
                    Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-07-15 10:39 +1000
                      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Brandon McCaig <bamccaig@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 11:39 -0400
                      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 02:12 +1000
                        Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-07-15 21:28 +0300
                          Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-07-15 21:57 +0300
                  Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Brendan Abel <007brendan@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 16:13 -0700
                    Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-07-15 10:45 +1000
                      Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-07-15 11:11 +1000
            Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 06:03 -0700
              Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-07-13 15:26 -0700
        Re: Were is a great place to Share your finished projects? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 23:51 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#110841 — Were is a great place to Share your finished projects?

Im asking this because im working on a small project, but i won't say what it is because i want to do it completely on myself.

I just say it has something to do with Steam and a Feature they rly need to add there... so i write it myself :D and it already is finished it only needs a GUI now.

And its not going to be compiled, so everyone can edit it and Fix the errors i did as a beginner(with that i mean, im going to do it a bit different than someone who knows python better as me), because i don't know if my HTML parser is going to be able to do his Function on all sides that may be used.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#110843

Am 30.06.16 um 14:48 schrieb Natsu Dragneel:
> Im asking this because im working on a small project, but i won't say
> what it is because i want to do it completely on myself.
>
> I just say it has something to do with Steam and a Feature they rly
> need to add there... so i write it myself :D and it already is
> finished it only needs a GUI now.

The best place these days to publish software is on github. And that 
includes actual development, not just the final results. For reasons 
why, see also: http://joshldavis.com/2014/06/13/put-yourself-out-there/

Github makes that extremely easy, just create an account, create a repo, 
"git pull" and start working. Your incremental changes will be updated 
with each "git push".

	Christian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110847

On 2016-06-30 14:09, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Am 30.06.16 um 14:48 schrieb Natsu Dragneel:
>> Im asking this because im working on a small project, but i won't say
>> what it is because i want to do it completely on myself.
>>
>> I just say it has something to do with Steam and a Feature they rly
>> need to add there... so i write it myself :D and it already is
>> finished it only needs a GUI now.
>
> The best place these days to publish software is on github. And that
> includes actual development, not just the final results. For reasons
> why, see also: http://joshldavis.com/2014/06/13/put-yourself-out-there/
>
> Github makes that extremely easy, just create an account, create a repo,
> "git pull" and start working. Your incremental changes will be updated
> with each "git push".
>
An alternative is Bitbucket.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110863

On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 1:09:31 AM UTC+12, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Github makes that extremely easy, just create an account, create a repo, 
> "git pull" and start working. Your incremental changes will be updated 
> with each "git push".

I start with “git init” and never pull, only push.

I do use “git fetch && git rebase origin/master master” to copy from upstream repos to mine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110865

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro
<lawrencedo99@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 1:09:31 AM UTC+12, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
>> Github makes that extremely easy, just create an account, create a repo,
>> "git pull" and start working. Your incremental changes will be updated
>> with each "git push".
>
> I start with “git init” and never pull, only push.

Same here, and I recommend it to my students because GitHub, when
looking at a completely empty repo (no commits at all) will give a
handy set of copy/paste-ready commands to add a remote and push. But
ultimately, it comes to the same thing.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110866

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016, at 19:06, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 1:09:31 AM UTC+12, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> > Github makes that extremely easy, just create an account, create a repo, 
> > "git pull" and start working. Your incremental changes will be updated 
> > with each "git push".
> 
> I start with “git init” and never pull, only push.
> 
> I do use “git fetch && git rebase origin/master master” to copy from
> upstream repos to mine.

In context, I assume that by "pull" he actually meant "clone". But,
yeah, git pull is mostly an attractive nuisance for environments that
have a clear hierarchy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110885

Am 01.07.16 um 01:16 schrieb Random832:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016, at 19:06, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 1:09:31 AM UTC+12, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
>>> Github makes that extremely easy, just create an account, create a repo,
>>> "git pull" and start working. Your incremental changes will be updated
>>> with each "git push".
>>
>> I start with “git init” and never pull, only push.
>>
>> I do use “git fetch && git rebase origin/master master” to copy from
>> upstream repos to mine.
>
> In context, I assume that by "pull" he actually meant "clone".

Yes, sorry, I meant clone.

	Christian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110871

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:09 pm, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:

> The best place these days to publish software is on github.


http://nedbatchelder.com/blog/201405/github_monoculture.html





-- 
Steven
“Cheer up,” they said, “things could be worse.” So I cheered up, and sure
enough, things got worse.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110873

Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> writes:

> The best place these days to publish software is on github.

For what value of “best”?

If one wants to avoid vendor lock-in, Github is not best: the workflow
tools (other than Git itself) are completely closed and not available
for implementation on another vendor's servers.

If one wants to communicate equally with Git repositories elsewhere,
GitHub is not best: federation between hosts is actively discouraged by
the lock-in.

If one wants to build a community on tools owned by that community,
GitHub is not best.

If one wants to teach newcomers with tools that will still be working
even when GitHub goes out of business, GitHub is not best.

If one wants to grow software freedom, Github is not best
<URL:https://mako.cc/writing/hill-free_tools.html>.

Convenience is not a reliable measure of how good something is, so it is
not the best measure of “best”.

-- 
 \     “For myself, I am an optimist — it does not seem to be much use |
  `\              being anything else.” —Winston Churchill, 1954-11-09 |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#110884

Am 01.07.16 um 03:38 schrieb Ben Finney:
> Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> writes:
>
>> The best place these days to publish software is on github.
>
> For what value of “best”?

The question was about visibility of a project for a single beginner 
developer.

> If one wants to avoid vendor lock-in, Github is not best: the workflow
> tools (other than Git itself) are completely closed and not available
> for implementation on another vendor's servers.

Yes, but that is relevant only if the workflow (i.e. pull requests) are 
an important part of the history. The code history is just git and that 
is independent from github. For projects which rely on a single 
developer, there is no issue. Additionally I wanted to point out that 
"finishing" a project is the wrong idea, at least in open source terms.

> If one wants to communicate equally with Git repositories elsewhere,
> GitHub is not best: federation between hosts is actively discouraged by
> the lock-in.

I don't understand what that means. I can git pull my local repo from 
somewhere else and then git push it to github. What do you mean by 
federation between hosts?

> If one wants to teach newcomers with tools that will still be working
> even when GitHub goes out of business, GitHub is not best.

? git will not stop working

> If one wants to grow software freedom, Github is not best
> <URL:https://mako.cc/writing/hill-free_tools.html>.
>
> Convenience is not a reliable measure of how good something is, so it is
> not the best measure of “best”.

Then please propose an alternative instead of just arguing. Make sure 
you try to understand the OPs objectives and background.

	Christian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111366

Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> writes:

> Am 01.07.16 um 03:38 schrieb Ben Finney:
> > If one wants to avoid vendor lock-in, Github is not best: the
> > workflow tools (other than Git itself) are completely closed and not
> > available for implementation on another vendor's servers.
>
> Yes, but that is relevant only if the workflow (i.e. pull requests)

Pull requests. Code review. Issues. Integration with other services. All
the social information around all of those interactions, and more.

If *any* of that is valuable, then yes it's important that it not be
locked to any one vendor.

If *none* of that is valuable, then why prefer GitHub? Clearly people do
find those quite valuable, and it is disingenuous to pretend that the
code is the only valuable thing in a Github repository.

-- 
 \     “The cost of a thing is the amount of what I call life which is |
  `\       required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long |
_o__)                                       run.” —Henry David Thoreau |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111372

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Pull requests. Code review. Issues. Integration with other services. All
> the social information around all of those interactions, and more.
>
> If *any* of that is valuable, then yes it's important that it not be
> locked to any one vendor.

Exactly how important? Not so important as to stop slabs of Python
from migrating to GitHub, including its pull request system. (Work in
progress; currently, PEPs are on GitHub, but the core interpreter
hasn't moved yet. See PEP 512.)

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111373

Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> > Pull requests. Code review. Issues. Integration with other services.
> > All the social information around all of those interactions, and
> > more.
> >
> > If *any* of that is valuable, then yes it's important that it not be
> > locked to any one vendor.
>
> Exactly how important? Not so important as to stop slabs of Python
> from migrating to GitHub, including its pull request system.

I maintain that it is important enough to stop that.

The migration happened anyway, because not everyone is convinced of the
importance of avoiding vendor lock-in of valuable data, over criteria
such as “this person happens to like Vendor-locked Solution Foo”.

There are other projects considering such a migration; I am hopeful they
can still be reasoned with.

-- 
 \              “Begin with false premises and you risk reaching false |
  `\   conclusions. Begin with falsified premises and you forfeit your |
_o__)                          authority.” —Kathryn Schulz, 2015-10-19 |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111375

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>> > Pull requests. Code review. Issues. Integration with other services.
>> > All the social information around all of those interactions, and
>> > more.
>> >
>> > If *any* of that is valuable, then yes it's important that it not be
>> > locked to any one vendor.
>>
>> Exactly how important? Not so important as to stop slabs of Python
>> from migrating to GitHub, including its pull request system.
>
> I maintain that it is important enough to stop that.
>
> The migration happened anyway, because not everyone is convinced of the
> importance of avoiding vendor lock-in of valuable data, over criteria
> such as “this person happens to like Vendor-locked Solution Foo”.
>

Fine. You're welcome to take a 100% philosophical stance; I applaud
you for it. (I understand Richard Stallman is so adamant about not
using *any* non-free code - software or firmware - that he restricts
himself to a tiny selection of laptops that have free BIOSes.)
Personally, I believe practicality beats purity in computing
philosophy as well as API design, and I'll happily let GitHub carry my
software. What's the worst that can happen? I have to switch to
somewhere else, and I lose the issue tracker and pull requests. In the
case of CPython, they wouldn't even be lost - they're (to be) backed
up. In the meantime, I'm on a well-polished platform with a large
number of users. The same cannot be said for *many* other hosts, even
if they do use exclusively free software.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111377

On Wednesday 13 July 2016 15:11, Chris Angelico wrote:

> You're welcome to take a 100% philosophical stance

It's not a philosophical stance to avoid vendor lockin, nor to avoid incipient 
monopolies, nor to avoid rewarding companies that behave badly.

It's not for philosophical reasons that we should avoid tendencies to band-
wagon jumping and monopoly building. Its for REAL, PRACTICAL reasons that the 
short-term gain will invariably be overwhelmed by the long-term loss.

You just need to value more than the immediate right here, right now, and not 
discount future risks excessively.

There are people who plan and plant great gardens which they will never see 
completed, trees taking many decades to reach maturity. And there are those who 
think that doing the washing on the weekend so they'll have clothes to wear on 
Tuesday counts as "long term planning".

People over-estimate the costs of technical competition and under-estimate the 
costs of monopolies and the single-network effect. They jump on the bandwagon 
of "but everyone else is using IBM/Windows/Word/iPhones/Facebook/Github/
whatever" and then wonder why conditions slowly get worse. Its boiling frogs 
everywhere.

Even if Github was 100% open source with no proprietary extensions, and the 
*technical* cost of leaving was low, the single-network effect would still lock 
you in, which leaves you (to some degree) at the mercy of Github's management. 
Don't like the fact that they run their servers on electricity made from 
burning puppies and the tears of little children? Too bad, what are you going 
to do, move your project to some backwater VCS where nobody ever goes? You 
might as well be on AOL for all anyone will ever find your project.

It boggles my mind that even devs who are the most socially aware and are all 
for diversity and codes of conduct and building a better world have such a 
blind eye when it comes to jumping on bandwagons and blindly following trends.


Time-to-read-Connie-Willis'-"Bellwether"-again-ly y'rs,



-- 
Steve

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111379

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Even if Github was 100% open source with no proprietary extensions, and the
> *technical* cost of leaving was low, the single-network effect would still lock
> you in, which leaves you (to some degree) at the mercy of Github's management.
> Don't like the fact that they run their servers on electricity made from
> burning puppies and the tears of little children? Too bad, what are you going
> to do, move your project to some backwater VCS where nobody ever goes? You
> might as well be on AOL for all anyone will ever find your project.

So what're you going to do? Move *now* to some backwater where nobody
ever goes, just in case GitHub ever turns evil?

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111381

On Wednesday 13 July 2016 17:00, Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> Even if Github was 100% open source with no proprietary extensions, and the
>> *technical* cost of leaving was low, the single-network effect would still
>> lock you in, which leaves you (to some degree) at the mercy of Github's
>> management. Don't like the fact that they run their servers on electricity
>> made from burning puppies and the tears of little children? Too bad, what
>> are you going to do, move your project to some backwater VCS where nobody
>> ever goes? You might as well be on AOL for all anyone will ever find your
>> project.
> 
> So what're you going to do? Move *now* to some backwater where nobody
> ever goes, just in case GitHub ever turns evil?

Move *now* to a viable alternative, while it's still viable and before it's too 
late, in order to encourage competition and discourage those idiots who don't 
know how to use Google and think Github is the entire Internet-for-code.

"I couldn't find it on Github, therefore it doesn't exist" is already a real 
phenomenon. Fortunately, at this point you probably won't want to accept 
patches from those people. But in five or ten years? I give odds of about 50:50 
that even competent coders will have bought into the Github-is-the-universe, 
just as even people who know better treat Facebook as the entire Internet, and 
worse.


"...some backwater where nobody ever goes..."

If you really mean that, then you're saying that Github has already captured 
such a dominant market share that they are an effective monopoly over all 
hosted DVCSes, and that programmers no longer have a choice about using them. 
Its Github, or you're invisible, and leaving is not an option.

If you mean that, then be honest:

"The horse has already bolted, and vendor lockin is not a concern, its a fact. 
All I can do is *hope* that Github doesn't turn evil."

On the other hand, if you genuinely think that Github *hasn't* captured the 
market, that migration away from them is still an option, then you've undercut 
your argument against using competing services. If you genuinely think that 
migrating away from Github to (let's say) Bitbucket is an option, then your 
quip about backwaters is invalid.



Speaking of F/B, a true story. A friend of mine in the US had this conversation 
(edited for brevity):

"You got married??!? When did you get married?"

"Oh, about three months ago."

"I'm disappointed that you didn't invite me. I would have loved to have come."

"What do you mean? I posted the details on my Wall. Didn't you see it?"



-- 
Steve

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111383

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> what
>> are you going to do, move your project to some backwater VCS where nobody
>> ever goes?
>
> "...some backwater where nobody ever goes..."
>
> If you really mean that, then you're saying that Github has already captured
> such a dominant market share that they are an effective monopoly over all
> hosted DVCSes, and that programmers no longer have a choice about using them.
> Its Github, or you're invisible, and leaving is not an option.

Your words, not mine.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111427

On 07/13/2016 01:00 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> Even if Github was 100% open source with no proprietary extensions, and the
>> *technical* cost of leaving was low, the single-network effect would still lock
>> you in, which leaves you (to some degree) at the mercy of Github's management.
>> Don't like the fact that they run their servers on electricity made from
>> burning puppies and the tears of little children? Too bad, what are you going
>> to do, move your project to some backwater VCS where nobody ever goes? You
>> might as well be on AOL for all anyone will ever find your project.
> 
> So what're you going to do? Move *now* to some backwater where nobody
> ever goes, just in case GitHub ever turns evil?

No, you just run git as it was designed to be used.  In a completely
decentralized fashion.  If Github had honored this aspect of git,
there'd be no problem.  A repo on GitHub would be just one of many
publicly-facing git repos.  But by refusing to allow federated pull
requests, GitHub has most definitely created lock-in.

I understand that in Python's case, pure cost wins out.  Python.org
could host a GitLab instance, which contains the repo tools plus ticket
tracking, etc, and ordinary developers could push their changes to their
own public git repos and send in pull requests and it would all work
swimmingly. However this comes at considerable cost in terms of
maintenance of the server and server software.  So I can understand the
allure of GitHub.  It's shiny and free-ish.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#111428

Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> writes:
> So I can understand the allure of GitHub.  It's shiny and free-ish.

Savannah.nongnu.org is a nice free host for free software projects.  I
suppose it's less shiny than Github.  On the other hand, Github is
written in Ruby--what self-respecting Pythonista would stand for that?! ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web