I find it interesting that so many people here are unhappy with the change. Sure, prices will go up for a lot of organizations, but is $9/worker/month really a lot to pay for all the stuff GitHub offers? At Bay Area prices isn't that about 5 minutes of developer pay per month?
For independent use it seems like a very positive change, in fact I'm guessing it's a direct challenge to GitLab. I was considering moving my stuff to GitLab simply because I'm tired of bundling experiments/prototypes into umbrella repos just to stay under the 10 repo limit at GitHub. For people like me this will be awesome, and I take it as a good sign that they're responding to the competition.
One thing I don't get however: how do they count shared access to private repos?
If I have a private repo and you have a private repo, and we each grant access to the other's repo so we can collaborate, do we now have two or four billing units?
They say "you can even invite a few collaborators" -- but how are you billed if it's more than a "few?"
I don't mind if they try to close the loophole of making up an "organization" out of a lot of "individual developers" but it seems a little vague.
> At Bay Area prices isn't that about 5 minutes of developer pay per month?
I work for an academic nonprofit. Asking to spend any money is like pulling teeth, and any purchase I make has to go through many layers of bureaucracy who don't understand or care what I do and have no incentive to make my life easier. I don't want to leave Github, but now I have to, because I just won't get the approval to spend hundreds a year. But I know that's nothing to Bay Area companies, so the rest of us will just go kick rocks or something.
> I don't want to leave Github, but now I have to, because I just won't get the approval to spend ~100's a month.
No you don't have to leave GitHub now. GitHub isn't forcing existing customers onto the new pricing, and it says in the post that if that changes at least 12 months notice will be given.
What announcement are you reading? It states very clearly that this is the new pricing model, period.
Yes, existing customers have a 12-month grace period before they're impacted by a price change... but that clock just started ticking. There isn't an indefinite opt-out for this model change.
I'm looking at this one [0]. Specifically this item in the FAQ:
> Will GitHub force me to move to per-user pricing after 12 months?
> No. At this time we are not enforcing a timeline to move and if in the future we do decide to set a timeline we are committing to giving you at least 12 months.
> Yes, existing customers have a 12-month grace period before they're impacted by a price change... but that clock just started ticking
"Will GitHub force me to move to per-user pricing after 12 months?
No. At this time we are not enforcing a timeline to move and if in the future we do decide to set a timeline we are committing to giving you at least 12 months."
So you have an indefinite period of time + 12 months, not a hard 12 months starting now.
Their nonprofit accounts are designed for "nonacademic" orgs. If there's an account type that's applicable to university research (not just students) then I'd be thrilled.
This is only for the teaching/student aspect of academia. There's the whole business side of academia which is still a non-profit, still doesn't have any money, but for which the academic stuff doesn't apply.
> but is $9/worker/month really a lot to pay for all the stuff GitHub offers?
You make it sound like they're curing cancer. What does GitHub really offer above and beyond the other providers?
As an example, their PR reviewing systems sucks balls. It chokes on larger PRs (250 files!? Really?). Also, with files which have been essentially replaced, the diff can become so large that GitHub won't even show it, and since you can only add comments on PRs, you're sunk. I have to resort to sending around emails with code lines and comments on them.
GitHub is amateur hour. Their half-assed implementations of almost every piece of their functionality reminds me of the same BS Apple does on iOS.
> If I have a private repo and you have a private repo, and we each grant access to the other's repo so we can collaborate, do we now have two or four billing units?
4. Each of you has 2. One for yourself and one for the collaborator. Which answers the question of why some people are unhappy with the change: it punishes organizations that collaborate a lot.
Out of morbid curiosity I switched ones of my orgs over to the new billing scheme. I have 4 users in the org team, and 1 external contributor (a client who has access). I am being billed for 5 seats.
So yes, if you invite external contributors to a single repo (Say a consultant with clients). You will pay for each and every account you invite. Gitlab it is!
From what I read, as long as you don't mind giving your collaborators full access, you can have as many as you want on your private repo. If you want to grant limited access (say, read but not write), then you have to use an org.
Yes, of course. I'm in Europe myself. However if you're a company trying to make money I see $9/mo as a fair price for what GitHub offers, pretty much anywhere.
And if it's really a lot of money then there is plenty of free software that can solve the same set of problems, you just have to install/configure/maintain/modify it yourself. Which should be a reasonable option if $9/person/month is a lot of money where you are.
(I get that for some people obtaining the $9 is difficult because they work for highly dysfunctional organizations, but that still doesn't make it an unreasonable fee.)
For independent use it seems like a very positive change, in fact I'm guessing it's a direct challenge to GitLab. I was considering moving my stuff to GitLab simply because I'm tired of bundling experiments/prototypes into umbrella repos just to stay under the 10 repo limit at GitHub. For people like me this will be awesome, and I take it as a good sign that they're responding to the competition.
One thing I don't get however: how do they count shared access to private repos?
If I have a private repo and you have a private repo, and we each grant access to the other's repo so we can collaborate, do we now have two or four billing units?
They say "you can even invite a few collaborators" -- but how are you billed if it's more than a "few?"
I don't mind if they try to close the loophole of making up an "organization" out of a lot of "individual developers" but it seems a little vague.