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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #101198

Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in

Show all headers | View raw

Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> > Anyone can take email data from the email server, migrate it to a
> > different implementation of the same email system, keep it running
> > with the same data and allow the same people to continue interacting
> > with it as before.
> >
> > Those are traits I think a community should require of any system
> > that controls vital discussions like pull requests.
>
> They are. Ultimately, a GitHub pull request is backed by a git pull
> request. Here's an example:
>
> https://github.com/MikeiLL/appension/pull/187

Yes, of course the VCS data is in Git and therefore can be accessed with
Git. Please stop raising that when *I'm not talking about* the VCS data
alone, I'm talking also about the data of the pull request feature.


The discussion data, code review data, etc. is all part of “GitHub pull
request”. How do we export, along with the VCS data, the data and system
that control the code review discussino and other useful features
entailed by “GitHub pull request”?

How do we get that data and confidently and quickly set up a system
hosted on a different provider that allows everyone involved to continue
the same code reviews and discussions etc. without GitHub?

To my knowledge we can't, short of re-implementing an expressly
proprietary non-standard system against the wishes of the vendor.

That's valuable community data being locked into a single-vendor system,
who explicitly rejects community access to the system and the data
needed to continue on a different provider.

It boggles my mind that so many people – even when the conversation has
directly raised the notion of different layers of technology that
control different layers of valuable data – blithely ignore the fact
that *the discussion itself* is dependent on a software system and data.

Control over that software system and data is important to control over
the valuable discussions, just as control over the VCS system and data
is important to control over the valuable source code.


Conversely, as Ned Batchelder points out, without all the proprietary
vendor lock-in centralised features, GitHub is a fairly unimpressive Git
hosting provider. The “but Git is free software, no one is locked in!”
is trivially true, and has an obvious response in “then there's no good
reason to move anything there”.

Please, those who are going to advocate for GitHub especially over other
Git hosting providers because it has specially valuable features, be
honest that you're advocating moving control of valuable information
away from the community that values them.

-- 
 \       “First things first, but not necessarily in that order.” —The |
  `\                                              Doctor, _Doctor Who_ |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: We will be moving to GitHub Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pylist@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 13:58 -0600
  Re: We will be moving to GitHub Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-01 12:33 -0800
    Re: We will be moving to GitHub Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pylist@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 14:46 -0600
      Re: We will be moving to GitHub Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-01 13:19 -0800
    Re: We will be moving to GitHub Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-01-02 18:02 +1100
    Re: We will be moving to GitHub Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 20:31 -0700
    GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in (was: We will be moving to GitHub) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-01-03 15:43 +1100
      Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in (was: We will be moving to GitHub) Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2016-01-02 20:56 -0800
        Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-01-03 02:04 -0500
          Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-01-03 08:44 +0100
            Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-01-03 19:03 +1100
              Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-01-03 09:33 +0100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-01-03 19:45 +1100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:18 +1100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-01-03 04:31 -0500
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-03 01:50 -0800
                Re: [python] Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in "W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us> - 2016-01-03 01:42 -0800
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-01-03 20:46 +1100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 21:17 +1100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 21:24 +1100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-03 02:42 -0800
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 23:33 +1100
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-03 21:29 -0800
                Re: GitHub's ³pull request² is proprietary lock-in Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-01-04 08:02 +0100
          Re: GitHub's ©¯pull request©— is proprietary lock-in Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2016-01-03 12:51 -0800
        Re: GitHub's �pull request� is proprietary lock-in Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 08:05 -0700
        Re: GitHub's �pull request� is proprietary lock-in Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 08:14 -0700
      Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2016-01-03 16:58 -0500
      Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in m <mvoicem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 11:21 +0100
        Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 10:41 -0700
          Re: GitHub's "pull request" is proprietary lock-in Josef Pktd <josef.pktd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 13:29 -0800
          Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in m <mvoicem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 01:24 +0100
    Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-01-03 19:51 -0500
    Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 21:16 -0700
    Re: GitHub's “pull request” is proprietary lock-in Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-01-03 23:58 -0500

csiph-web