Edit: seems like they fixed it, it works for me
You must log in or # to comment.
My company owns their infrastructure and we don’t have issues like this and our production servers are working like oiled machines and yet they want to move to 3rd party cloud services for reasons that have yet to be explained
a brief conversation:
Cloud good, very good for dynamic sizing up and down.
but sir we don’t need to scale up and down for our business.
but cloud good.
I marvel at the proficiency with which Microsoft tears down every piece of software it touches nowadays.
I’ll get downvoted for this, but I think they take good care of github and Minecraft. As for the rest though… not so good.
I haven’t played Minecraft for a while, but I was under the impression that Microsoft was progressively turning the Bedrock version into a microtransaction hellscape. If I’d have to reluctantly commend Microsoft for anything, I’d rather go for Visual Studio Code.
Bedrock indeed, but you didn’t even have Bedrock edition before Microsoft, so you can’t really say MS fucked it over since it was always kinda bad. Java has been pretty nice and the “big content updates” direction under Microsoft really rejuvenated the game.
Thats because Microsoft has refused to change anything meaningful, there are new mobs but they dont drop anything of value and there are new biomes but the blocks are all decorative. Microsoft knows they’ll screw it up so they only make surface level changes.
… Didn’t they revoke the Minecraft licenses people purchased because they didn’t manage to migrate their Mojang accounts to Microsoft accounts in a short amount of time?
People were given three years to migrate, I wouldn’t quite call that short
People have absolutely taken a multi-year break from Minecraft before.
Really though, why is there a time limit at all? Google still allows you to convert old Youtube accounts to Google accounts, why can’t Microsoft do the same?
This thread pivots hard from version control jokes into a somber discussion of the future of Minecraft.
I have found my people. You all are amazing.
Reliance on external services to build and test code is absolutely braindead design
It’s not like internal build servers are 100% reliable, scaleable and cheap though. Personally I’ve found cloud based build tools to be just a better experience as a dev.
Jesus Christ, can you not even conceive of the idea of building on your own machine?
I’m talking about in a professional environment. You basically need a team to manage them and have a backlog of updates and fixes and requests from multiple dev teams. If you offload that to something cloud based that pretty much evaporates, apart from providing some shared workflows. And it’s just generally a better experience as a dev team, at least in my experience it has been.
Permanently Deleted
Well yeah strictly you don’t, but the idea of having a single machine under someone’s desk as a build server managed by one person where you have multiple dev teams fills me with horror! If that one person is off and the build server is down you’re potentially dead in the water for a long time. Fine for small businesses that only have a handful of devs but problematic where you’ve multiple teams.
Bottom line for most business though: As long as the cost makes sense, why bother self-hosting anything. That’s really what it comes down to. A bonus too, as most companies like being able to blame other companies for their problems. Microsoft knows that, and profited greatly with Windows Server/Office/etc. for that very reason.
Yup, exactly this. Why waste resources internally when you can free up your own resources to do more productive work. There’s also going to be some kind of SLA on an enterprise plan where you can get compensation if there’s a service outage that lasts a long time. Can’t really do that if it’s self managed.
Oh, the stories I could tell you… I should write a book some day.
People forget git is a DVCS, you can send PRs to each other without relying on Github.
Wait what
Yeah dog pretty much everything on the github website is an interface to display info held in the .git folder of the website.
Thats how theres github, gitlab, gitea, gitlab, forgejo, etc etc. There are even applications you can download to visualize info in git that run on your local machine, and only see youe local filesystem.
Maybe what I misunderstood is where git ends and github starts. I know there are other hosting platforms, and I’ve used a lot of git visualizers. But what I’ve never tried to do is use git with multiple developers without connecting to some 3rd party server. Is there some peer to peer functionality built into git or did I totally misunderstand your original comment? Or are you literally sharing the git folder via network file system, thumb drive, etc?
Git doesn’t have a concept of a preferred repository; your local copy is exactly as valid to git as a git server hosted on github.
The originally intended workflow as I understand it involved generating patches which would be shared via a mailing list.
In practice there will generally be a repository that’s considered “canonical” for a project, whether that’s the one on the computer of the lead maintainer or some hosted solution.
A basic git server is essentially just a repository owned by a restricted user with SSH access granted to maintainers.. This can allow users to push and pull from a centralised or semi-centralised repository in much the same way as GitHub.
Yes the original use case is sending patches back and forth on the Linux kernel mailing list
