Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

http://venturebeat.com/2015/06/24/google-has-quietly-launched-a-github-competitor-source-code-repositories/

by pbreit • 11 years ago

214 157 11 years ago

venturebeat.com

pbreit• 11 years ago

Well, not quite a competitor. I presume it's expected to work better with Google Cloud than elsewhere?

empyrical• 11 years ago

Yeah, it looks like it's mainly a way to manage code you're running on Google Cloud services

yeukhon• 11 years ago

It just reminds me of Google App Script and its editor.

bradhe2• 11 years ago

So interesting. This race for features between the cloud vendors feels crazy to me, but totally makes sense from a business perspective. Classic attempt at locking you in to a single platform.

AdieuToLogic2• 11 years ago

Classic attempt at locking you in to a single platform.

Isn't that what happens immediately after one places their artifacts into "the cloud"?

bradhe2• 11 years ago

Nah, there are multiple cloud vendors out there. My platform runs in DO, AWS, and GCE for instance. The notion that cloud itself locks you in will disappear soon.

fixermark4• 11 years ago

From the repository feature's docs (https://cloud.google.com/tools/cloud-repositories/docs/):

"Using Cloud Source Repositories is easy if you are familiar with Git. For example, you can add a Cloud Source Repository to a local Git repository as a remote, or you can connect it to a hosted repository on GitHub or Bitbucket"

If the goal is lock-in, they're doing it wrong.

camhenlin• 11 years ago

Can't wait to see how long it takes them to get rid of this one like they did with Google Code

clintonc• 11 years ago

Well, it could last ten years, like Google Code did. :P

baby2• 11 years ago

Except git is the shit right now

grepz3• 11 years ago

Can you elaborate on that? Just wondering.

fixermark4• 11 years ago

It's integrated directly into the cloud product. Since its purpose is not to host your code, but make your code visible to the cloud product itself, expect it to live as long as the cloud product.

... and since the cloud product actually offers a direct way for Google to generate revenue from the service, I'd assume it'd live for awhile. ;)

exacube• 11 years ago

This article is just click bait.

Pretty sure this product is just so you can store your code/repo for your project using Google's cloud services. It's part of a whole for their cloud offering.

mwilcox• 11 years ago

Yep, more of a competitor to Microsoft's Visual Studio Online than any of the social coding platforms: https://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/products/what-is-visual-s...

mynameisvlad• 11 years ago

Well, one part of VSO, since that includes Bugs/Build/Test. I don't really know many private source-only hosting providers though.

stickfigure• 11 years ago

Yeah. One consequence is that stacktraces in the appengine log viewer are clickable and take you to actual code. Modest but useful.

downboy• 11 years ago

Much like any PaaS provider. Heroku, Openshift etc.

d0vs• 11 years ago

It's not new either, it's been integrated into App Engine for a while

thekevan• 11 years ago

This just seems to be a place to have the code that you run on Google Cloud Platform. Not exactly a competitor.

jfoster• 11 years ago

It's certainly Google Cloud branded, but it appears to have somewhat equivalent functionality to Github.

For Google to launch something purely as a "Github competitor" would be silly because those using Github would quickly dismiss it; "we already have Github!"

So Google are playing up the integration with the rest of Google Cloud, integrating with Github and Bitbucket, and offering additional features.

You have to extrapolate a bit to realize it, and Google probably won't admit it, but this is definitely intended as a Github/Bitbucket competitor.

skj8• 11 years ago

No, GP was correct. It is intended as a way to get your source into the platform.

They're private repos to which only people in your projects have access.

personjerry• 11 years ago

Hasn't Google Code existed for ages?

No one seemed to like it. Heck, Google didn't seem to like it enough to give it any love, just check out the UI on the site: https://code.google.com/hosting/search?q=label%3aPython

detaro• 11 years ago

google code is EOL: http://google-opensource.blogspot.de/2015/03/farewell-to-goo...

wasd• 11 years ago

Sure, it'll compete with GitHub but I think a more exciting possibility is that it'll compete with Heroku. CodeCommit (similar service offered by AWS) integrates with other AWS services to help manage deployment and releases but I still find the entire AWS platform to be very difficult to use. I would love to see Google add pressure to all three companies to make their respective products better.

campers2• 11 years ago

GCP has a push-to-deploy https://cloud.google.com/tools/repo/push-to-deploy

That along with the cloud debugging from their git repo are some nice to haves.

mdekkers• 11 years ago

...because google code worked out so well....

skj8• 11 years ago

It did. When googlecode.com launched, it was an immediate market leader (keep in mind that it displaced the wretched sourceforge.com). When the new wave of source hosting (github, bitbucket, etc) made its way up, googlecode fell by the wayside and, after becoming a distinctly third-rate offering, was end-of-lifed.

stock_toaster• 11 years ago

So they killed Google code to... launch another code hosting thing?

Does Google have too many siloed product managers? Maybe you can only advance up the corporate ladder by releasing new products, and fuck all if they get killed later, because you got your promotion?

No clue what the cause. Just seems weird looking on from the sidelines.

Juha• 11 years ago

A while ago I remember hearing in some podcast from googler that they internally have separate source code management system (not related to Google Code). I wouldn't be surprised it he was talking about this one and they finally decided to make it public. Killing Google Code was probably just because not many people used it (externally or internally).

aiiane• 11 years ago

It's far more likely the Googler was referring to Google's variant of Perforce, which is what is used for most internal projects.

Kudos• 11 years ago

Google code was project hosting, not just source hosting. This clickbait article is talking about a Google product that just does source hosting and is a part of the overall Google public cloud product strategy.

icefox3• 11 years ago

Google code did source hosting and was one of the primary features.

icefox3• 11 years ago

After just wasting the last three nights migrating my old project (code was on GitHub, but the rest wasn't) off of Google code the chance of me putting code on a Google hosting service any time soon is pretty much zero.

About once a year for the last several years I have spent a few hours/days migrating stuff off of Google because the project is being shut down. Maybe they are just cleaning house from the mass of project in 2005-2010, but the constant reminder that the stuff I create is in danger if it lives on Google's servers is probably not the lesson they want to be teaching me.

snarfy• 11 years ago

This is exactly why I won't use anything they make anymore. I cannot trust it will be around two years from now.

sergiosgc2• 11 years ago

This is clickbait. Nevertheless, my first thought was "GitHub is much better and much much safer than anything Google can offer". Back in the day, were Microsoft to offer a competitor to a small company's product and my reaction would be: "They're dead in the water".

Food for thought...

sagivo• 11 years ago

Yes. Google now try to take it all like the old Microsoft. No wonder they get bad response for each new product like that people simply don't trust them anymore.

EGreg3• 11 years ago

I pretty much trust Google, Apple, Amazon etc. to safeguard my data better than others.

What do you mean? Don't you use gmail, publish to the app store, and host with AWS? Do you use Stripe for payments? Google Maps? Facebook login? You are trusting these companies with a great deal.

prapam2• 11 years ago

How is it much much safer?

sergiosgc2• 11 years ago

In the sense that I can trust it to be around five years from now. Google has, today, a bad perception in terms of product lifetime.

sologoub• 11 years ago

Anyone else notice that the photo they are using is the old Santa Monica office that Google has moved out of a while back?

hoodoof3• 11 years ago

Does this have an API?

piotrkaminski3• 11 years ago

The article says they'll open one up later this year.

guelo• 11 years ago

My team has just started looking for a github replacement because the code review workflow is just not working for us, we need something with more structure. I think there's plenty of space for feature and price competition, especially for private repos where github's social network effects don't matter as much.

Matt138• 11 years ago

Have you checked out any of the GitHub plugins that do this, something like https://www.zenhub.io could help you add more structure to GitHub

skeeterbug• 11 years ago

Doesn't BitBucket/Stash provide more structure for code reviews? You can lock down the main branch and force code to get merged via a PR.

meric• 11 years ago

We use gerrit hosted on EC2 mirroring commits to github for backup.

RyJones• 11 years ago

I am an unabashed fan of Gerrit - the fine-grained ACLs can be annoying to wrap your head around, but the code review interface is quite nice.

the only thing I've found missing is the ability to render images inline. If someone submits a documentation update with SVG and PNG updates, you have to download the changeset to see the files. It would be nice if an option for "view this attachment inline" were available without installing extensions.

kibwen• 11 years ago

Github's code review capabilities are a huge weak point for team projects, and I've seen several services spring up to attempt to capitalize on this. Mozilla's Servo project is currently trialing one called Reviewable, here's a demonstration: https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/6456

halayli3• 11 years ago

check out stash by atlassian https://www.atlassian.com/software/stash

kodablah2• 11 years ago

In my experience Stash is not much better. It has simple commenting on diffs, but we had to have a plugin to automatically "unapprove" everyone once a new commit was added to a PR. It's social aspects are no better than GitHub code comments either.

I always found Crucible much nicer and it integrates w/ Stash decently, but I worry it and Fisheye are on the backburner at Atlassian.

marcinkuzminski• 11 years ago

Maybe you should look at RhodeCode, it has several different workflows for code-review. From very simple like just voting on each individual commit, to a fully blown server side mergable workflow that includes, voting, checks by CI, and integration to external services. We did a blog about it recently on how we use it internally: https://rhodecode.com/blog/increased-automation-at-rhodecode...

Displaimer: i'm the CTO of RhodeCode

Zhenya• 11 years ago

Displaimer = Displayed Disclaimer?

_yy• 11 years ago

Take a look at Phabricator:

http://phabricator.org/

It has it's own code review workflow which is, in my opinion, superior to Github's.

A nice summary:

http://cramer.io/2014/05/03/on-pull-requests/

lmm• 11 years ago

What kind of structure? Bitbucket/Stash have explicit "approve" built in, which has always been plenty for my use case.

jobvandervoort• 11 years ago

FYI We've added 'Approve' to GitLab Enterprise Edition as well with the latest release (7.12).

haynes• 11 years ago

Hi guelo,

can you elaborate a bit more what you are looking for? What kind of structure do you need?

Without these informations, I'll just throw gitlab in the possible alternatives pool.

https://about.gitlab.com/features/

Please note that I'm biased since I'm on the gitlab core team. :)

farkas2• 11 years ago

I'm the CEO of Atlassian (who run Bitbucket & Stash). Would love to get your feedback on what we can do to improve. We really pride ourselves on making products that have the right level of control in our products.

Or email me - scott <at> atlassian.

fezzik02• 11 years ago

Hi! I'm a Developer Advocate over at Atlassian, and I'd like to point out that Stash offers extensible merge controls through merge request check plugins. In addition to pre-configured and third-party plugins, an open API allows you to make custom merge requirements.

https://developer.atlassian.com/stash/docs/latest/tutorials-...

In Bitbucket, we don't support this yet, but we do allow branch restrictions to ensure only trusted users are able to merge sensitive branches and many teams find this to be a suitable proxy for that behavior.

https://blog.bitbucket.org/2013/09/16/take-control-with-bran...

BenjiSujang• 11 years ago

Competition is always good. Looks good for Google cloud users. However certainly no GitHub competitor.

mirceal• 11 years ago

meh. this has zero chances of competing with github. I think it's meant more for Google Cloud Platform users to have a place where to store their code within the same "cloud"

alaskamiller• 11 years ago

While I was at Google one insight I had is that there's a copy of most internet products. Given the cadre of college grads they hire to work there, cloning something is almost like a fun little coding challenge.

Dropbox? There's a clone. Pinterest? Clone. Everything. Then they dogfood it and if there's more interest they gather up more resources to inevitably pitch the idea to Marissa Meyer, who then plays with it, design the business case for it, and approve a proper budget for it.

If the product is good then the news leaks or they launch it. After awhile if the Google audience doesn't like it they cut it loose.

Which goes to say... any time some investor asks you what happens if Google comes into your space, you should say: good.

beefsack• 11 years ago

Competition in the Git hosting arena seems to be largely nullified by the fact that it's trivial to use multiple remotes.

geofft• 11 years ago

The reason people use GitHub is everything around the git hosting: the web interface, the account system, pull requests and issues, forking, comments, wikis, Pages, even the desktop and mobile apps. Hosting git repositories is straightforward, by design.

This article is only slightly more sensible than claiming that S3 is a GitHub competitor because you can git clone over HTTP.

shrineOfLies4• 11 years ago

Lately, the Web UI has been sucky, I relied on my username button quite a bit, now I have to perform two steps to go to my user page

mikekchar2• 11 years ago

To be honest, I think it has always been sucky in many ways. They change it quite frequently, but it doesn't actually seem to be changes that improve the UI. It only makes it frustratingly different than before.

I often wonder if the projects my team works on ends up that way. We A/B test a lot of changes and often find that it makes absolutely no difference in conversion. In the end we often don't change things that seem to be "obvious" improvements for fear that we'll just frustrate our customers by changing things in ways they don't care about.

UI design is hard :-)

blhack• 11 years ago

Is that what just changed? I swear it felt like I had to go searching for my repos yesterday when I was looking for something.

k-mcgrady• 11 years ago

Just went on Github and I can't believe they remove that button. Doesn't seem like anything is gained from it and I'm sure I'm not the only one who uses it daily. I really hope they reverse that change.

laumars2• 11 years ago

To be honest, I only use github because everyone else does and because it's almost expected I should to. And since I'm job hunting, it means I throw a few projects on to github as a portfolio.

But for everything that I really care about, I still maintain private repos on my home server.

xiaoma• 11 years ago

Why?

IanCal• 11 years ago

I use GH because everyone else seems to, and while the UI is nice, I think the permissions system is utterly broken so I now have to have multiple accounts so that I can allow third party access to my repos but not every repo I have access to.

pwelch2• 11 years ago

Agreed. GitLab's permission system seems better for specific permissions so hopefully that will translate well when/if 3rd parties start writing plugins for it.

joshuak• 11 years ago

Calling a source code repo service a competitor to GitHub is like calling a online book store a competitor to Amazon.

Hint: source code is not GitHub's value, just like books where not Amazon's. GitHubs true value is something Google is profoundly bad at.

hoodoof3• 11 years ago

What is gtihub's true value?

medecau• 11 years ago

Social.

10098• 11 years ago

It looks more like a beginning of an online IDE than a direct github competitor. It's just convenient if you're already using Google's cloud services.

csells4• 11 years ago

I'm curious what kinds of additional features you'd be interested in here. In these comments so far I've heard code review, access control and online IDE. Would any of those be useful? What else would be useful?

Chris Sells PM, Google Cloud Platform

nulltype5• 11 years ago

GitHub has at least some good ideas in this area. Code review and issue tracking are nice, but everyone seems to want something different from those systems so I'm not sure how to do that in a reasonable way. Access control would be nice for deploys I guess?

I hope that someone really does make an online IDE that means I don't have to use a local IDE anymore, but I'm not certain how feasible that is. Atom seems like a giant step in the right direction.

davidbanham• 11 years ago

It can serve as a “remote” for Git repositories sitting elsewhere on the Internet or locally.

That's not a feature of this product, it's just how git works.

catshirt• 11 years ago

sources say it allows you to "host" your "repository" in the "cloud"

csells4• 11 years ago

Of course, we're pretty proud of our git support. We also support "connected repos" where we keep a repo in Cloud Source Repositories in sync with a repo you specify on GitHub or BitBucket; if you make a change on GH or BB, it's reflected into GCSR and vice versa. The idea is that you should be able to integrate with the features we're building on top of GCSR without making you move away from GH or BB. Useful?

Chris Sells PM, Google Cloud Platform

hoodoof3• 11 years ago

WTH does this mean?

Are they saying it is not secure?

https://cloud.google.com/tools/cloud-repositories/docs/

Note Cloud Source Repositories are intended to store only the source code for your application and not user or personal data. Do not store any Core App Engine End User Data (as defined in your License Agreement) in a Cloud Source Repository. To use a hosted Git repository with a Cloud Source Repository, you must first open an account with GitHub or Bitbucket (independent companies separate from Google). If you push source code to a Cloud Source Repository, Google will make a copy of this data which will be hosted in the United States.

skj8• 11 years ago

It means only put code in source hosting, not user data. That is, follow best practices with your repository.

jabo• 11 years ago

Off topic, but the image in the article is of a building in Santa Monica that Google moved out of atleast 2 years ago.

bradabrams• 11 years ago

Ha! thanks... I was wondering about that :-)

jokoon2• 11 years ago

Anecdote: I remember using mercurial on google code, at some point it did not work, a push was just timing out for some reason. I switched to bitbutcket and then used github. Google answered the issue, but I already made the switch, and I don't even know if they fixed it.

mineo• 11 years ago

Fun fact: google code now has a " We have some known issues with hg repositories. " banner up since a few days ago.

jokoon2• 11 years ago

Well I had this issue with mercurial 2 years go.

sidcool• 11 years ago

Hasn't Google been moving code to GitHub itself?

skj8• 11 years ago

Yes. Open source GCP projects are hosted either on github or googlesource.com, an unindexed place for git and codereview. (eg https://go.googlesource.com is where the go language is hosted).

And keep in mind, googlesource.com is not the same service as the one talked about in this article. Not even the same backend.

shrineOfLies4• 11 years ago

I would've liked it better, if it also had auto-deploy to gce, and auto load-balancing, scaling, health-checks and service discovery.

seanp2k2• 11 years ago

So, if it was AWS?

shrineOfLies4• 11 years ago

im ok with that

skj8• 11 years ago

The first one, sure, but all the others don't really seem like features of source hosting...?

shrineOfLies4• 11 years ago

Its not about source hosting, I'm talking about automating the entire workflow, cutting out devops, cutting costs. Its the future man

k_bx• 11 years ago

To me, this more looks like a Google's cloud IDE (targeted Java), for which it would of course make sense to have code-hosting there also. It makes sense for Google to have one, unlike just a GitHub competitor, imho.

hliyan• 11 years ago

1. Requires credit card number for free trial

2. No built in issue tracker or wiki (?)

skj8• 11 years ago

That's because it's not actually project hosting, despite what the article may claim. It's a way to get your code onto the platform.

xsace2• 11 years ago

When I go to princing and quota I get:

This Beta release of Cloud Source Repositories is free and can be used to store up to 500 MB of source files.

No thanks! I still remember what happened with AppEngine.

nulltype5• 11 years ago

What happened with AppEngine?

campers2• 11 years ago

The SDK's were slow to update, the Java App Engine doesn't support Java 8 yet the Python and/or PHP version are behind a bit I think. There's a bunch of bugs which haven't been resolved after a long time. The instances were underpowered for the price, Java ones took a long time to start up which compounded issues with the auto-scaler.

I used it a little bit a few years ago and despite the issues with the original platform I'm quite interested in the new Docker based managed-vm app engine platform, where you can build your own images and have much better control, and compute engine pricing.

xsace2• 11 years ago

When they went out of beta/preview, the prices skyrocketed to absurdness and many people had to shutdown their app because of everything being coupled to their specific API and the notice being to short to adapt.

So yeah, don't invest into something when you don't know what the final pricing will be.

im19833• 11 years ago

Sorry, but I just can't trust them. I am absolutely sure that Google will shut it down in X years.

eatonphil• 11 years ago

I don't understand the reasoning here, or you would benefit from dependent types. I am /also/ absolutely sure that /everything/ will shut down in X(company) years.

im19833• 11 years ago

GitHub will not shutdown in X years. That's their main business. While Google has the tendency to shutdown products after their beta phase. From Google POV that's a side project to their ad biz.

bsimpson2• 11 years ago

500 MB lifetime storage doesn't seem like a whole lot.

csells4• 11 years ago

To be clear, this is the current limit in beta and it's per repo, so if you have multiple cloud projects, you get multiple repos. We're thinking about adding support for multiple repos per project in the future. Would that be useful?

Also, and we're planning on upping the limit once we reach GA. What do you think a reasonable limit should be for a git repo? Our goal is to strike the right balance between usefulness and abuse.

Chris Sells PM, Google Cloud Platform

nulltype5• 11 years ago

Is it weird if you just charge GCS-style pricing for git data?

bsimpson2• 11 years ago

You should absolutely support multiple git repos per project. If someone writes npm-compatible modular JavaScript code, it wouldn't be hard to have a dozen proprietary repos supporting a single reasonably sized project.

sytse6• 11 years ago

Every IaaS provider (Google, Amazon, Azure) has added a code hosting service or will do so in the future. Having your code hosted here will increase lock-in which is the best way for the IaaS provider to increase margins in the future. However, code hosting is not the essence of that GitHub, BitBucket and we at GitLab offer. The essence is code collaboration: mentioning people, doing a code review, activity streams, etc. Getting this right is hard and I wonder if many IaaS providers will get this right.

The code delivery pipeline consists of issues, IDE, code hosting, CI, code review, configuration management, Continuous Delivery (CD) and a PaaS service. Code hosting is a first step and getting all the rest right is a lot of work. Services working on getting the IDE right are Koding, Nitrous.io, Cloud9, CodeAnywhere, Codio and CodeEnvy. And I suspect that GitHub Atom is running in a web-browser so they can effortlessly offer it online in the future. For configuration management you want to integrate with Chef, Puppet, Ansible, Salt and Docker.

At GitLab we offer CI and CD via GitLab CI. We hope for a multi-cloud future where organizations will deploy to different cloud providers. They will use PaaS software that spans the different IaaS providers. Cloud independent PaaS software offerings are CloudFoundry, OpenStack, OpenShift, Kubernetes, Mesos DCOS, Docker Swarm and Flynn. We want to ensure that GitLab is the best option to do code collaboration upstream from these offerings.

dkhenry• 11 years ago

So one thing GitLab and others don't offer that Google can is tight integration with Deployment. Yeah we have all used the CI servers to do a form of Continous Delivery, but can google and amazon surpass those offerings by giving a tighter integration that a third part can't offer.

sytse6• 11 years ago

Right now our support for deployments is lacking. On the short term we'll add documentation how to use the Travis DPL gem to push to the IaaS providers.

Currently we're thinking about solving this problem, but in our opinion it is more than a simple deployment. You need a build pipeline.

We're thinking about adding a build pipeline configuration to .gitlab-ci.yml file. Right now we're looking into how to deal with dependencies that trigger a build and how to allow for multiple environments (staging, preprod, prod) to be deployed.

We think that solving the build pipeline properly (like GoCD and Concourse already have) in a simple to setup way will offer a lot of value. What do you think?

hamitron• 11 years ago

on a more serious note, what will your new logo look like?

sytse6• 11 years ago

Thanks for asking, see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/gitlab-artwork/blob/master/new...

mchahn• 11 years ago

And I suspect that GitHub Atom is running in a web-browser so they can effortlessly offer it online in the future.

A note about atom ... It does not run in a web browser and it would be damn hard to port it to the web since it runs on Node. It uses chromium for displaying the DOM but is not in a browser.

err4nt2• 11 years ago

Thats cool...until the day Google decides to close it and shuts down the service and all projects trapped on it. But until then, its pretty cool!

err4nt2• 11 years ago

Google Notebook, Google Sites, Google Wave, Feedburner…

fixxer• 11 years ago

Github really owns the "organization aspect".

For my personal projects, I'm fine with my own git server on a cheap vm, but for work I've been really happy with Github's issue tracker and org membership administration (with which we use OAUTH heavily for internal tools, several of which queue background computation). Github issues are much easier for tracking job submissions from analysts than integrating with the company email, and developers prefer it.

I looked at GitLab a year ago. I liked it, but it was a little funky (avatars weren't working; obviously not mission critical, but little shit like that erodes confidence -- either support a feature or don't, but never half ass it because I'm not going to admin over a server when I've got a chorus analysts bitching about it being hacky). GitLab people: this was a digitalocean prepared image version of GitLab, in case you're listening.

Version control is really the most minor and easy to replicate part of Github's value proposition.

sytse6• 11 years ago

Thanks for looking at GitLab and sorry to hear that avatars didn't work. There was an issue with avatars and using relative urls 7 months ago: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/369 This was fixed. But if you used relative urls please consider switching to a full hostname, it is a better experience. We recommend installing packages from our package server https://about.gitlab.com/downloads/ since templates on cloud providers might be out of date.

finnjohnsen22• 11 years ago

Post Snowden I'm looking to move away from cloud services and not entangle myself further.

fixermark4• 11 years ago

I see this sentiment quite often, and I'm not really sure how to respond to it (other than the snarky, obvious "Enjoy your cave").

Hacker News is a cloud service---we share comments on news stories in a collaborative fashion. I assume this means something closer to "I don't want my personal, sensitive data hosted by anybody and I'm willing to pay for the inefficiency and inconvenience of only being able to access it from a handful of nodes (or having to maintain my own hosting solution on my own hardware)" than the alternative interpretation "I'm a Luddite; down with the Internet?"

finnjohnsen22• 11 years ago

You assume correctly.

Any service, especially served abroad like in the US, where I share any of my data, I no longer feel as good about using.

skj8• 11 years ago

Calling the GCP source hosting a competitor with github is nonsense. No public access to these repos, for one, so they're completely unsuitable for general project hosting.

peter303• 11 years ago

Google abandoned its previous Github comptetitor. Unlikely many outside of the Go-phers will use the new one.

samfisher83• 11 years ago

Google had googlecode way before github. They just didn't do much with it.

arbuge• 11 years ago

Sites like GitHub thrive on the community they engender. Google no doubt has the tech chops to compete with anybody on a pure technical basis, but community is not their forte. Witness Google Plus.

sova• 11 years ago

The _actual_ link should lead to https://cloud.google.com/tools/cloud-repositories/

Google has quietly launched a GitHub competitor

Related Stories