/tech/ - Technology★

These hipsters would all collectively ejaculate if Google had bought it instead. "open sores" advocates got what they deserve. I think one of the BSDs even uses Github for their development.

That's a valid counterpoint to the most unhinged paranoia, but it doesn't address concerns that Microsoft is going to make Github worse in completely open, above the table ways. Microsoft might provide Gitlab's hosting but that doesn't let them interfere with Gitlab's policies.

>>926024

I've seen them around, but I'm never sure. Do those sites encourage collaboration like GitHub, or are they more like SourceForge? Ever since I've deleted my GitHub account, it kind of sucks. Firstly, I can't really work with most libre projects, and, secondly, my employers probably won't look at any other hosting site.

>>926020

>>926015

Exactly. Why do people care if Microsoft affects the affairs of GitHub? We all knew this was the logical conclusion of a commercial service. Why can't we resent GitHub's buyout simply for what it entails pedagogically? Is that really not enough?

Let's think of creative ways Microsoft can destroy GitHub, maybe it will come true.

1. Microsoft account mandatory for new registrations.

2. Enforcement of a new CoC and deletion of projects that don't comply.

3. Mass deletion of projects that may violate Microsoft's patents.

>>926063

4. injection of microsoftware into binaries that are uploaded to github

Alas, gitforked.com is already registered and points to some schmuck's facebook page. There ends the joke and thus my only interest in git.

Gitlab allows for self-hosting.

Back to /g/ you insufferable faggot.

>Atlassian

nope

>>926057

>probably won't look at any other hosting site

gitlab is your best bet then. I've seen it used first hand in enterprise environments. Which is one reason a former company I worked with switched to it (that's how I learned about gitlab).

>>926024

this one is so badly GIMPed.

>>926066

It will work at most once. And this will be the end of Microsoft.

'Hosted by' doesn't mean shit. Microsoft doesn't have any meaningful influence over Gitlab. Anything they could consider doing would just destroy their hosting business. Meanwhile, Gitlab can leave at any time. One day, Azure; the next day, SoftLayer.

This is so stupid I don't even think it's Microsoft FUD. Just someone who thinks every landlord in a city is the same because they all have the same municipal water supplier.

gitgud.io

>>926075

Yeah. Sounds like a shitty compromise, though, since GitLab is hosted by GitHub, but I guess it's better than working under the GitHub name. I've actually used a GitLab repo every once and a while, so, there's that.

>>926094

Microsoft's influence over GitHub is literally the last of your concerns, you sensationalist dolt. The issue of GitHub's buyout is what it represents. If you could guarantee that Microsoft did nothing to GitHub but still owned it, does that some how make it good in your retarded logic?

>not just hosting the shit you make on your own webserver

Why?

>>926105

Non-consequentialists leave

>>926104

>root

>dollar sign

illiterates shouldn't be memeing

>>926110

> Why?

Because I don't have a web server. It also puts up an additional barrier for contribution if people have to sign up for yet another service just for this one project.

>>926111

>Implying what Microsoft buying one of the most important services for free software represents isn't a consequence in itself.

Ironically, you're the non-consequentialist here for relying on hyperbole in order to justify your hysteria.

>>926133

No, notabug is hosted by Hetzner Online. It's GitLab that's hosted by GitHub, like in the OP pic. Of course, you can run your own instance if GitLab, thus GitGud; although, the people who host GitGud are proprietary cucks (see >>926107).

>>926138

>>mfw Freetards being btfo in all directions

Incorrect, see >>926024

>>926140

For the record, NotABug is fairly comparable to GitHub, but Savannah is very regressive, even worse than SourceForge.

>>926138

It's amazing how much text you can put into a post while literally saying nothing.

self-host your shit or don't use your shit online.

>>926152

Germans love their GPL shit.

>>926024

>notabug

> NotABug.org will provide public hosting for projects for which the following conditions are met:

>...

>The content of your project, and the conduct of your projects' members conform to our Code of Conduct

GNO.

>>926168

what is their coc?

>>926170

>NotABug.org is dedicated to providing a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion.

>We do not tolerate harassment of participants in any form.

>This code of conduct applies to all NotABug.org spaces, including Git repositories, issues, comments, and wiki content, both online and off. Anyone who violates this code of conduct may be sanctioned or expelled from these spaces at the discretion of the NotABug.org operators.

>Some projects hosted on NotABug.org may have additional rules in place, which will be made clearly available to participants. Participants are responsible for knowing and abiding by these rules.

>Clearly available is defined as a file named "CONDUCT" in the root of a repository, optionally in markdown format. This document supersedes any project specific code of conduct in case of a conflict.

I'm pretty sure they need a CoC for legal purposes.

>>926172

Yeah, sure. And enforcing it on users too. Fuck off, you and your faggotry. Repo.or.cz is the only answer.

>>926173

Are you the owner of that? I've seen it being shilled several times here already.

>>926093

>this will be the end of Microsoft

<some virgin neckbeards will blogpost about this

<how will microsoft ever recover?

How comfy is life under the rock you are living?

>>926173

Well I don't use git as a shitposting or political tool so I really see no issue with this.

This board has a code of conduct. It's in the sticky.

>>926008 (OP)

you're using github/gitlab to publish your repo online. your hashes are cryptographically signed. why the fuck do you care what site it's on? sage for inane thread

>>926008 (OP)

This is why we need a blockchain git replacement. Probably should write it in rust!

>>926138

Why are you here?

>>926008 (OP)

This is just their host service provider, you fucking retard.

>>926307

Or just finish GitTorrent so it's actually functional.

>>926310

>Organization: Microsoft Azure

HURRR

https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/06/why-and-how-gitlab-abandoned-microsoft-azure-for-google-cloud/

They switched to Google Cloud two months ago faggot.

>>926074

That's bitbucket, dipshit. GitLab isn't associated with Atlassian. GitLab is owned by GitLab Inc.

>>926137

GitLab is hosted on Azure, which is Microsoft's cloud service. It's not great, but GitLab is not hosted "by GitHub". How do people get this fucking stupid?

>>926343

You don't know what an IP address is, do you?

FUCK I JUST FOUND OUT THAT GENTOO.ORG IS HOSTED BY AMAZON=

WHAT DO

>>926008 (OP)

https://gitgud.io

>>926024

Fuck off GNUfag

>>926173

<don't harass people, not even if they're gay

>HOLY FUCK THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE

>>926370

Gentoo has been pwn'd at the website and bug reporting level for some time now. The forums are fine but still MITM'd. The webservers for the package manager that server package lists are mostly hosted by IP's in (((israel))) due to IP redirects at the ISP level. Although (((they))) don't mess with the packages if you use the right ones, most systemd based packages are backdoored. If you compile with very fucking weird optimizations that elminate types of bugs from compiling at all you can avoid most of the backdooring cancer.

they're not owned by microsoft and they're switching to google cloud you tech illiterate fuckwit

>>926370

Who gives a fuck where the website is hosted? I couldn't care less.

>>926392

Show proofs. What IPs, what packages?

>>926403

>Show proofs.

Use a united states based proxy to access gentoo.org and check the SSL provider. Now use a hong kong based proxy and access bugs.gentoo.org. The SSL certificate for both sites are different. For me gentoo.org uses (((let's encrypt))) but bugs.gentoo.org uses (((GlobalSign nv-sa))) One of them is MITM'd thereby.

<What IPs,

>dox yourself goy

No, download a gentoo live CD and run the command

>emerge --sync

Over and over again and check the IP's via reverse lookup either with whois or traceroute. The IP redirects differ depending on the region you look them up in for ICAAN's tracking of such.

>what packages?

ffmpeg, udev, firefox, chormium, and others I may have not noticed yet. I stopped using the backdoored portions of those programs or stopped using them entirely for they wouldn't compile with sane, but exotic, optimizations as to root out bugs in them. Weirdly enough they got buggier as you updated them and with chromium and firefox that makes sense. But with udev and fffmpeg that maked no fucking sense at all short of the devs intentionally backdooring their shit or the gentoo.org SSL compromise thing being abused to fuck with packages.

T.gentoo user for 5-15 years.

>>926418

>Use a united states based proxy to access gentoo.org and check the SSL provider. Now use a hong kong based proxy and access bugs.gentoo.org. The SSL certificate for both sites are different. For me gentoo.org uses (((let's encrypt))) but bugs.gentoo.org uses (((GlobalSign nv-sa))) One of them is MITM'd thereby.

The more likely explanation is that they're just hosted by different people on different servers using different certificates.

Have you tried checking in any way, or did you just assume the most harmful explanation? Try contacting the people who manage the servers. If they're in on it, they wouldn't need to use multiple certificates to enable MitMing.

>>926418

>The SSL certificate for both sites are different.

They're different regardless of whether you use proxies or not, idiot.

>>926425

Oh, well it doesn't change the fact that there shouldn't be two totally different ssl certificates for the same website/subdomain.

>>926426

They have different IP addresses. They're on different servers. Why should they share a certificate?

>>926423

<Try contacting the people who manage the servers.

>dox yourself goy

No.

>If they're in on it, they wouldn't need to use multiple certificates to enable MitMing.

Indeed, that's why I still use gentoo as it is not completely botnet. More like (((they))) have a way to target specific users/setups/packages for botnet at (((their))) whim. But meanwhile the main gentoo community remains untouched and doesn't notice a thing.

<The more likely explanation is that they're just hosted by different people on different servers using different certificates.

It's a subdomain for the main domain gentoo.org. All a domain is, is a redirect to an IP where the server is. Someone at the domain/TLA/ISP level is fucking with the IP redirect by making a different SSL provider for that domain be used for bugs.gentoo.org and gentoo.org even though both are considered valid certificates. When you have a domain it's subdomains use the same SSL provider as the main domain name unless it is a hijacked domain. Such as either gentoo.org or bugs.gentoo.org. But it is impossible to derermine which is the real domain because we would need the person responsible for the gentoo foundation's purchase/usage of the SSL certificate to state which is the real one.

>>926428

Have you never heard of load balancing? Domains might redirect to different machines at different IP's but would still use the same SSL certificate. Take for example amazon.com and it's subdomains. They are not all the same IP nor the same server, but the domain and subdomains use all the same name, amazon, and the same SSL provider.

>>926429

They're not just different servers, they're different websites. Same as python.org and mail.python.org, which also have different SSL certificates.

There's no rule that subdomains need to have the same certificate as the domain they descend from. Sometimes it's a sensible choice, but if they point at essentially separate services that are run separately then sharing a certificate would only make things less secure.

>>926433

>they're different websites. Same as python.org and mail.python.org, which also have different SSL certificates.

This is a perfect example of domain hijacking. Which is the real python.org? python.org's ssl certificate or the sub-website/domain mail.python.org? You can't prove it either way.

<There's no rule that subdomains need to have the same certificate as the domain they descend from.

You are essentially saying that if I visist 8ch.net/tech and 8ch.net/pol that if they have different SSL certificates I am not being MITM'd. You are insane and wrong. bugs.gentoo.org and gentoo.org are the same website/domain with the only difference being that bugs.gentoo.org, just like forums.gentoo.org, is a subdomain. The same website, but a subset of that website. Which means the SSL certificate should be the same across the website as to assure of its trustworthyness.

>>926434

Yes another example would be sys.8ch.net and 8ch.net. They use the same SSL certificate because they are the same website, but sys.8ch.net is a subdomain of the website 8ch.net. They are the same website but sys.8ch.net is dominated by 8ch.net since it is in the name. So when I can go to packages.gentoo.org/forums.gentoo.org/gentoo.org and they all use the same SSL certificate and yet bugs.gentoo.org uses a different one, one of them it MITM'd.

>>926434

>You are essentially saying that if I visist 8ch.net/tech and 8ch.net/pol that if they have different SSL certificates I am not being MITM'd.

That's a different thing entirely and you're a fucking idiot.

>>926418

>I stopped using the backdoored portions of those programs

Can you elaborate on what exactly you mean by backdoored? That would be huge if true.

>>926429

>When you have a domain it's subdomains use the same SSL provider as the main domain name unless it is a hijacked domain

This is completely wrong. You can have wildcard certs, or multi named certs, but you do NOT have to use those.

GITGUD IO is made by /tech/, GET IN

>>926370

It's over lads

EMBRACE

>>926491

I wonder what will the Extend phase will entail. Improved integration with Visual Studio at the expense of compatibility? Some custom Git commands, Git extensions of some kind which will be difficult/pointless to support outside Windows?

>>926024

Real chads host their repos themselves.

>>926127

Web servers are cheap and you should have one.

Add a patch filedrop, no account needed.

Recommend a password manager as an alternative to wanting to only ever sign into Facebook.

>hurrdurr

also: I wasn't paying attention to chans when this terarogenic cancer sprouted. Please tell me its a redditor thing.

This expression makes me want to drink bleach until I forget it.

>>926063

>2. Enforcement of a new CoC and deletion of projects that don't comply.

No corpo could be worse than the current SJW overlords at GitHub.

>>926185

>>926198

>accusing people of "sexual orientation" and "gender expression"

>fine

>>926370

uninstall gentoo

>>926602

this is heresy

>>926434

I'm starting to realize you just don't know what domain names are.

If I visit 8ch.net/tech/, the following happens:

- 8ch.net is resolved to an IP address

- the document at /tech/ under the domain name 8ch.net is requested from the resolved IP address

If I visit 8ch.net/pol/, the following happens:

- 8ch.net is resolved to an IP address

- the document at /pol/ under the domain name 8ch.net is requested from the resolved IP address

If I visit sys.8ch.net/mod.php, the following happens:

- sys.8ch.net is resolved to an IP address

- the document at /mod.php under the domain name sys.8ch.net is requested from the resolved IP address

sys.8ch.net and 8ch.net are different domain names. They're allowed to be entirely separate. Domain names are separate from URLs. You can have a domain name without a URL. You can try sshing into 8ch.net, you can try sshing into sys.8ch.net, but you can't try sshing into 8ch.net/tech/ because that's not a domain name.

mail.python.org and docs.python.org don't need to have the same SSL certificate, just like fsf.org and kernel.org don't need to have the same SSL certificates. In both cases, the parent domain is the same, but that doesn't matter. The full domain is what matters.

>>926618

why are you conflating fsf with linux when linux is operated under its own organization?

>>926628

Why conflate docs.python.org with mail.python.org when they might be operated by different people on different servers?

They're run by the same organization, but that's no reason to share a SSL certificate.

The point is that docs.python.org and mail.python.org both have python.org as a parent, and fsf.org and kernel.org both have org as a parent. There's no technical rule or convention of any kind that they have to share SSL certificates.

>>926640

Maybe anon is confused and thinks that every ssl certificate is a wildcard *.domain.tld

>>926640

<fsf.org and kernel.org both have org as a parent.

Domain extension /=/ domain/subdomain.

<They're run by the same organization, but that's no reason to share a SSL certificate.

Why then does amazon use the same SSL certificate for all it's subdomains and other major websites do the same? Why does forums.gentoo.org/packages.gentoo.org/gentoo.org use the same SSL certificate but bugs.gentoo.org does not?

>>926618

<sys.8ch.net and 8ch.net are different domain names. They're allowed to be entirely separate.

No they aren't. The dominion of 8ch is *.8ch.net in it's ssl certificate so sys.8ch.net would be a sub-dominion of the domain 8ch.net and not a seperate dominion. Hence why the ssl certificate for gentoo being valid for the dominion *.gentoo.org would have all the sub domains such as bugs.gentoo, forums.gentoo, and packages.gentoo have the same certificate. But they infact do not. It's interesting the poster above brought up kernel.org's certificate as they have two diffeernt certificates for their website also. This would mean we can't prove who then is the real kernel.org, Why am I the only one noticing this shit?

>>926678

>Domain extension /=/ domain/subdomain.

It's a top-level domain, not a domain extension. Most top-level domains are unused, but they're capable of resolving, and some of them actually do.

Top-level domains are different by convention, but they're not that different technically.

>Why then does amazon use the same SSL certificate for all it's subdomains and other major websites do the same? Why does forums.gentoo.org/packages.gentoo.org/gentoo.org use the same SSL certificate but bugs.gentoo.org does not?

It could be that those other gentoo.org subdomains are managed by the same person, in which case sharing SSL certificates is easier. There are reasons to share SSL certificates, it's just not a hard rule. If the same domain uses different SSL certificates something's up, but different domains may use different SSL certificates, or the same SSL certificate.

>>926678

>No they aren't. The dominion of 8ch is *.8ch.net in it's ssl certificate so sys.8ch.net would be a sub-dominion of the domain 8ch.net and not a seperate dominion. Hence why the ssl certificate for gentoo being valid for the dominion *.gentoo.org would have all the sub domains such as bugs.gentoo, forums.gentoo, and packages.gentoo have the same certificate. But they infact do not.

A certificate issued for *.8ch.net can be used for all subdomains of 8ch.net, but it doesn't have to. It should be used consistently on all domains it's used on at all, but it would be valid for 8ch.net and sys.8ch.net not to use the same certificate.

>It's interesting the poster above brought up kernel.org's certificate as they have two diffeernt certificates for their website also. This would mean we can't prove who then is the real kernel.org

I said fsf.org and kernel.org have different certificates. Please read more carefully.

If a single domain actually has multiple certificates then that gets flagged, for example by the SSL observatory built into HTTPS Everywhere.

>Why am I the only one noticing this shit?

Because there's nothing to notice. This is entirely as expected.

If you don't believe me, just go ask one of the people who run domains that don't have the same certificate as sister domains whether it's intentional. Like I said before, if they were part of the conspiracy there wouldn't be a need to use different certificates in the first place.

>>926694

<if they were part of the conspiracy

>implying this is a real conspiracy

lulwut

>I said fsf.org and kernel.org have different certificates. Please read more carefully.

I know, kernel.org and its subdomain cdn.kernel.org have different certificates. Read what I said more carefully next time.

>It could be that those other gentoo.org subdomains are managed by the same person

Does that mean someone other then the gentoo foundation manages bugs.gentoo.org? Why should I trust this random person that isn't gentoo with a bug site dedicated to gentoo bugs? How do I know that bug reports aren't gettting shoahed? How do I know which certificate is actually supported by the gentoo foundation? Some websites list their certificate in a secondary place as to verify which is the real one, insomuch it is possible over https that is.

>for example by the SSL observatory built into HTTPS Everywhere.

Not everyone uses that extension and the EFF has been compromised after lieing about PGP being compromised and their former leader (((dieing))). So how can you even trust that extension, which is not often updated at that.

>>926104

kek'd

More like pajeethub amirite

>>926057

>employers won't look at a different web site

>can't work with (((libre))) projects

Can you be more transparent with your shilling here anon?

>>926563

2018 and people aren't doing this

smh tbh fam

>>926678

are you retarded on purpose?

>>926943

It's called derailing son.

so that the ZOG can play the "shutdown" card during the Hades timeline

>>926897

Because your picture literally changes nothing. The fact that you would show it, implying that your image somehow changes the point makes you seem like a disingenuous bastard. Gitgud is managed by retarded proprietary cucks, and that is the damning evidence.

>>926863

I wish I could. If that were so, I might have some idea as to what you're trying to imply.

>>926454

<Discord

<Video games

<Gitlab

Three strikes and you're out.

>>928470

>gitlab

whats wrong with that. its open source

>>928478

>(((open source)))

Caught the shill.

>>928498

HOH FUCK!

how dare someone give shit away for free and then ALSO have extra features you can pay for

>>928464

(((Discord))) is catering to the lowest common, since they have Matrix as well.

Learn 2 deal with brainlets first.

>>928470

Newfag anti-GG detected. >>>/cuckchan/

>>928498

So does GitGud use the NSA shell company? No? GTFO >>>/leftypol/

Does MS allow trannies to determine the CoC? If not the whole thing is already an improvement.

>>928575

<t-they're just catering to the lowest common denominator! It's not like they actually use Discord, the just condone and endorse it!

<you must be against GG, so that's why you hate video games! G-go back to cuck chan, you cuck! You're the cuck for not liking proprietary software!

<Libtard! Go back to drinking your soy; your harsh words will never break through my Nintendo Labo Armor!

That is perhaps the worst backtracking I've ever seen.

>>926113

Song used in webm?

>>926138

Nigger.

>>926008 (OP)

>>lets all move to gitlab instead!

>Fucking retards

You sound butthurt, as if you have a personal stake in where people host their code. Just sayan. GitHub dun GitGoof'd. Microsoft gonna embrace, extend with incompatible VS integration and Microsoft logins, then extinguish their free as in freedom closed-source git ass! Moving to GitLab makes sense.

no

https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/06/why-and-how-gitlab-abandoned-microsoft-azure-for-google-cloud/

Microsoft should make Windows open sources and irrevocably BTFO the freetards.

>>930664

How would that BTFO the "freetards"? It would make us win, retard.

>>930671

If you open source the microsoft the microsoft wins.

>>930589

Gitlab is fucking botnet https://archive.fo/GRSPQ https://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://gitlab.com

>Netblock Owner Microsoft Corporation

>Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond WA US 98052 52.167.219.168 Linux unknown 4-Jun-2018

The kikes are going full shut it down mode on opensource by taking over github and tricking security devs into hopping into gitlab as botnet. USE LITERALLY ANYTHING ELSE.

>>930800

Netblock means owner of the ip retard. Its because gitlab is using a vps for their frontend. Just like the millions of other sites that use AWS, GCE, or Azure. It has nothing to do with the site or company.

>>930812

Literally all of those things are fud that have been explained above or in the other thread you are shitting up. Fuck off shill.

google is a bigger botnet than microsoft.

everything is botnet

>>930657

why is there a news article of gitlab changing hosting companies?

>>926897

freenode is gay

>>931496

I think the better question is that of why gitlab is still using azzure cloud months later.

>>931455

>shitting up the thread

>by pointing out logicial insonsitency in arguements

>by talking about thread topic

You still haven't answered my questions and are resorting to ad hominim instead of explaining your thoughts logically. I'm no shill but either way that doesn't change gitlab's shady history and partially closed source software which is botnet. Gitlab's website blocks you from downloading branches of FOSS except the master branch unless you make an account btw. Their website also doesn't work very well if you block botnet/javascript.

>>931983

>You still haven't answered my questions

I literally answered all of them in posts above and instead you come back with the exact same list

>>926008 (OP)

Wait until people look up who made their OS

>>926138

>women posting on the internet