DEV Community

Discussion on: What's your opinion on Microsoft's GitHub Acquisition?

Collapse
 
deep_erx profile image
deep-erx • Edited

Microsoft can buy Skype, LinkedIn or other products used by bilions of people. Can buy also GitHub, but is forgotting that github is first of all a community,which usually is the most difficult thing to buy, because is more than a bunch of accounts.

Collapse
 
nirisarri profile image
Nicolas De Irisarri

natfriedman.github.io/hello/
Nice insigt from the CEO-To-Be

Collapse
 
dance2die profile image
Sung M. Kim

Thanks @deep_erx .

I am highly looking forward to whether Linux source code will stay on GitHub or not(meaning how the Linux community will react)

Collapse
 
Sloan, the sloth mascot
Comment deleted
 
bobnadler profile image
Bob Nadler

If Linus has an rms-like reaction, they'll probably bolt. OTOH, there may be business reasons to stay.

Thread Thread
 
nektro profile image
Meghan (she/her)

The Linux on github repo is just a mirror and MS is very Linux friendly (Windows now has WSL)

Thread Thread
 
rubberduck profile image
Christopher McClellan

Not to mention they’re a platinum member of the Linux Foundation...

Collapse
 
mckabue profile image
Kabue Charles

i don't think Microsoft can remove the Linux source code from GitHub given they are working on their own Linux distribution

Collapse
 
jvanbruegge profile image
Jan van Brügge

The linux source was never on GitHub. The repo you linked is just a mirror of torvalds moster tree. It would not even be possible to develop a software like linux on GitHub

Thread Thread
 
dance2die profile image
Sung M. Kim

Ah, I wasn't aware that it was just a mirror.

just out of curiosity
Would you mind sharing why it'd not be possible to develop Linux on GitHub? (because I have never been involved with such a big project before)

Thread Thread
 
jvanbruegge profile image
Jan van Brügge

There are many reasons, but I think the two most important are:

  • Linux does not have a single source of truth. Yes, there is the tree of Torvalds, but thats just for the mainline development. Every company developing Linux has their own trees. They may merge commits off the Torvalds tree and vice versa, but most of the time those developments have different goals (ie Ubuntu vs embedded car media system). GitHub is too much tied to one source of truth.
  • Pull Requests. Githubs way of receiving contributions is via Pull Requests. For a development with lots of different contributors and maintainers, this does not work. A contribution to the graphics system goes through at least to levels of maintainers that provide feedback, before it goes to Linus for final merge. Having all contributions for all parts in one place would be too much.
Thread Thread
 
dance2die profile image
Sung M. Kim

Thank you so much.
I was able to glance at what such a huge project involves.

Thread Thread
 
rubberduck profile image
Christopher McClellan

Having all contributions for all parts in one place would be too much.

That’s nonsense. If anything Github has a bunch of features that make it easier to keep track of forks.

Thread Thread
 
jvanbruegge profile image
Jan van Brügge

The point is, a fork in the Github sense is to provide changes to thr master copy. As Linux as multiple masters, having all contributions go zo one master copy does not make sense

Thread Thread
 
daniel15 profile image
Daniel Lo Nigro

Also see this reply from Linus Torvalds himself: github.com/torvalds/linux/pull/17#...