6 ms·

Unfortunately their open source support is very little to non existent. It's great, and it doesn't work outside Facebook.

aliveli 4y ago
Stay tuned ;)
- epage 4y ago
  A bit skeptical when there are relatively recent commits like > Re-sync with internal repository
  - joatmon-snoo 4y ago
    Open sourcing an internal repository with extensive, ongoing work on it is always a difficult affair, because you're creating a second source of truth. (It isn't just how you manage external contributions, but also workflows like releases and CI.) I wouldn't consider this to be a problem.
    - epage 4y ago
      It means they haven't (yet?) transitioned to open-first and it'll require proving themselves that they'll do open-first development before trusting them. Not willing to bet my work on a product where the governance isn't open but everything is driven by and for a single company's needs.
- ripphab 4y ago
  For what, another Phabricator, that I’ll inevitably have to migrate my company away from again? So if history serves the next announcement to watch for is your departure from Facebook and the launch of Edenity, which will be sunset and abandoned inside a decade once it fails to IPO. Am I close?
- wocram 4y ago
  vaporware?
travisd 4y ago
Facebook has a terrible track record when it comes to open-sourcing their internal tools. See: Phabricator, HHVM, Flow, Jest, ... Even React, which is their most popular library, is not actually "open source." They're very transparent about the fact that their priorities are Facebook's needs -- even if they do take community input. None of this is per-se bad, but you should definitely treat an open-source project out of Facebook with skepticism when it comes to adopting it for your own use cases (possibly making sure you're not too locked in when an incompatible v2 comes out with virtually no warning after FB's internal implementation drifts).
- peterhunt 4y ago
  This is not a fair characterization of React. The tech lead of the project doesn't even work at FB anymore.
- folkrav 4y ago
  > Even React, which is their most popular library, is not actually "open source." How do you define "open source"? It typically simply means the source code is available. By any definition I can think of, React is definitely both free and open source. How they design the software or if they take contributors isn't really relevant.
  - xcambar 4y ago
    nowadays, it is expected that open source is also a synonym for “community-driven”, which is a very bold assumption. I don’t know how we got to this point but it’s interesting to notice that the terminology drifted.
    - picardo 4y ago
      By that definition, any software project that is driven by a BDFL wouldn't be open source, including Linux. The terminology hasn't drifted that much. I think there is a small and vocal group of people who are trying to take back "open source" by reframing what it means, so as to exclude corporate projects. It doesn't make sense to me.
bjackman 4y ago
I'm actually curious what the strategy is here. To my knowledge only FB, Google and MS do megascale monorepo, and Google and MS already have a solution. Are there now other companies outgrowing Git that Facebook is hoping to build a community with?

aliveli 4y ago

Stay tuned ;)

epage 4y ago
A bit skeptical when there are relatively recent commits like > Re-sync with internal repository
- joatmon-snoo 4y ago
  Open sourcing an internal repository with extensive, ongoing work on it is always a difficult affair, because you're creating a second source of truth. (It isn't just how you manage external contributions, but also workflows like releases and CI.) I wouldn't consider this to be a problem.
  - epage 4y ago
    It means they haven't (yet?) transitioned to open-first and it'll require proving themselves that they'll do open-first development before trusting them. Not willing to bet my work on a product where the governance isn't open but everything is driven by and for a single company's needs.
ripphab 4y ago
For what, another Phabricator, that I’ll inevitably have to migrate my company away from again? So if history serves the next announcement to watch for is your departure from Facebook and the launch of Edenity, which will be sunset and abandoned inside a decade once it fails to IPO. Am I close?
wocram 4y ago
vaporware?

travisd 4y ago

Facebook has a terrible track record when it comes to open-sourcing their internal tools. See: Phabricator, HHVM, Flow, Jest, ... Even React, which is their most popular library, is not actually "open source." They're very transparent about the fact that their priorities are Facebook's needs -- even if they do take community input. None of this is per-se bad, but you should definitely treat an open-source project out of Facebook with skepticism when it comes to adopting it for your own use cases (possibly making sure you're not too locked in when an incompatible v2 comes out with virtually no warning after FB's internal implementation drifts).

peterhunt 4y ago
This is not a fair characterization of React. The tech lead of the project doesn't even work at FB anymore.
folkrav 4y ago
> Even React, which is their most popular library, is not actually "open source." How do you define "open source"? It typically simply means the source code is available. By any definition I can think of, React is definitely both free and open source. How they design the software or if they take contributors isn't really relevant.
- xcambar 4y ago
  nowadays, it is expected that open source is also a synonym for “community-driven”, which is a very bold assumption. I don’t know how we got to this point but it’s interesting to notice that the terminology drifted.
  - picardo 4y ago
    By that definition, any software project that is driven by a BDFL wouldn't be open source, including Linux. The terminology hasn't drifted that much. I think there is a small and vocal group of people who are trying to take back "open source" by reframing what it means, so as to exclude corporate projects. It doesn't make sense to me.

bjackman 4y ago

I'm actually curious what the strategy is here. To my knowledge only FB, Google and MS do megascale monorepo, and Google and MS already have a solution. Are there now other companies outgrowing Git that Facebook is hoping to build a community with?