back to article No, GitHub's source code wasn't hacked and posted on GitHub, says GitHub CEO

GitHub's CEO has denied that the site's source code was posted to GitHub. News of the supposed leak and posting came from a site called Resynth that linked to a Wayback Machine snapshot of a GitHub repo that purported to be the work of GitHub CEO Nat Friedman and was labelled "This is GitHub.com and GitHub Enterprise." …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    " An example of this is when GitHub went offline for two hours, leaving thousands of open-source projects inaccessible and unusable.”

    I'll bash Microsoft as much as the next guy, but that had to be the most ridiculous comment ever.

  2. Tessier-Ashpool

    Rather Meta

    C compilers that compile themselves; GitHub source on GitHub. All rather lovely concepts.

    Reminds me of a computing book I bought a long time ago. In the index at the back, it featured the following entry:

    Recursion

    - See Recursion

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Rather Meta

      That would be K&R's "The C Programming Language". The index entry for recursion includes a pointer to itself.

      1. TimMaher Silver badge
        Windows

        Re: Rather Meta

        Dammit!

        Now I shall have to root about in the spare bedroom to find my copy.

        Reminds me of “The Devils Dictionary of Computing”, sometime in the early eighties.

        Infinite Loop

        viz. Loop Infinite.

        —————————-

        Loop Infinite

        viz. Infinite Loop.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    They don't have a leg to stand on this stance

    If they believe in open source they should open source their own code. End of. Otherwise they're just another bunch of corporate hypocrites.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They don't have a leg to stand on this stance

      They actually do open source boat loads of it these days. Not everything but even the likes of Canonical keep some things under wraps.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      GitHub CEO Nat Friedman

      Friedman: Hi there! We just want to lock you in a little bit...

      "...so we recommend people sign their commits and look for the 'verified' label on GitHub to ensure that things are as they appear to be.

      Verified.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Commit signing is a standard Git feature.

        I don't use GitHub so don't know how their "verified" label works. If it is as in GitLab, it relies on the signing user uploading their public key to the site so that the site can verify that the key used to sign was the same as uploaded to the user's profile.

        This is less secure than plain Git, which relies in your local keyring and is thus able to tell you if you trust that particular signing key, as well as whether the signature is valid in the first place.

    3. Blackjack Silver badge

      Re: They don't have a leg to stand on this stance

      If they ever did that Google would just fork the code and make money out of it.

      1. chuBb. Silver badge

        Re: They don't have a leg to stand on this stance

        it was called google code it was a worse version of github so much like codeplex they shuttered it and told you to migrate to GH

    4. chuBb. Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: They don't have a leg to stand on this stance

      Eh???

      LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

      What would open sourcing the github site achieve?, a bunch of clones without the backend to operate as github does, realistically you would be looking at a ruby (so 2007) code base with some markdown stuff, possibly some useful ish (it will be bespoke to GH's ops needs) telemetry modules, and a load of NPM libs pulled in for front end stuff. Even if they were to open source the backend architecture it would amount to mainly config files for other open source projects and be pretty much useless to anyone wanting to setup there own github competitor as economies of scale would dictate that your not going to need 10's of petabytes multi tenanted git repositories, plus who use a 1:1 clone as a startup and not actually innovate and try and carve a niche out???

      If its to offer a different use case as some sort of collaborative workspace, i would suggest GIT is about the worst choice possible for file versioning unless what your trying acheive is 100% plain text based, GIT and Binary files do not play nicely (i have it on good authority this is why perforce is king in the computer games world as it handles binary files better like 3d models etc.), ask anyone who has inherited a repo for a website chock full of commited content (as opposed to layout) images, and then wonders why the index is several gigabytes in size but the actual source is a couple of megabytes and takes ages to scan...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: They don't have a leg to stand on this stance

        "What would open sourcing the github site achieve?"

        While I kind of agree (and also don't care), look at it this way; if you are 100% correct, what are they persistent at hiding? I think for the most part you're correct but, I do think there is a butt load of marketing and data mining/sharing going on for "partners".

        As far as GIT for text only, I 100% agree but, that is also the point of GIT :-/ (GIT != TAR). The binary thing is kind of hilariously dragged on and on as every now and then you'll still see people complaining that they couldn't upload their > 4GB file... that always gives me a good laugh. As far as you inheriting ridiculously used GIT's, well you can hate me but, you need better "friends".

  4. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Fundamental Transcendental Relativity :-)

    Just don’t mention pandemic, the election, the global recession, or the fact that Denmark is about to cull its national mink herd because it’s feared a new coronavirus has crossed over from the furry creatures into humans.

    Would the mink be thinking the converse obverse ...... a new coronavirus has crossed over from humans to furry creatures ?

    1. IGotOut Silver badge

      Re: Fundamental Transcendental Relativity :-)

      Holland and Spain have ready done this sfor the same reasons.

  5. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Seek and Ye Shall Find AI Heavenly News

    Now that's encouraging news , IGotOut ...... and it begets the question for what similar reasons? To see if there is an Engaging Parallel Source Supplying Virtually the Same Future Product with Almighty Immaculate Content a Universal Constant for Peer Mentoring and Monitoring of Pioneering Present Provision from AIDrivered Systems of Future Administration/Executive Office Manifestation?

    Any Positive or Negative or Deadly Silent Answer there admits a Parallel AI Singularity ..... and Astute ACTive Alternate Reality ?

    And posed as a question to ask yourself.

  6. steviebuk Silver badge

    Sorry to ask

    Couldn't ask on Reddit as "You're too new so can't post".

    Looking at The Guardian website for the American Election and have become fascinated by the interactive American map. Click on a state and you can see all the counties. I noted the Metro appears to using it, but on a crappy scale so it doesn't work well on their site.

    Question is. Is this something The Guardian bods created or is this from somewhere open source?

    Not promoting the paper at all, and we can all ignore the politics, I just really like the map

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2020/nov/05/us-election-2020-live-results-donald-trump-joe-biden-presidential-votes-arizona-nevada-pennsylvania-georgia

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021