12 ms·
AWS CodeCommit
- zxcvcxz 11y agoIt looks like we're talking about these new AWS features whether we want to or not..
- dangrossman 11y agoWe're talking about them because HN users submitted the stories and other HN users voted them up.
- zxcvcxz 11y agoStrange they both have the exact same number of upvotes (about 1 per minute too) and one was posted by an amazon employee. Not like there's ever been a corporate shill thread on HN... edit: and look, we have a new user who just created an account to say they were "eagerly waiting for this!" on the other thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pragar https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pragar
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago> and look, we have a new user who just created an account to say he was waiting for this on the other thread Maybe he or she was waiting for this? Why does everything need to be a conspiracy to promote corporate America? Granted you could be right but I'd bet on the simple reason first (someone submitted it and it was upvoted).
- zxcvcxz 11y agoYeah, you're probably right. Just a funny coincidence.
- dangrossman 11y agoThey have the same upvotes because they were submitted at the same time. They were submitted at the same time because they were both just posted on the AWS blog. People are watching the AWS blog right now because there's an AWS conference happening right now, and new product announcements happen at conferences. There's a large segment of HN users that are interested in AWS and other infrastructure topics, and would upvote both stories. I'm one of them; I upvoted them from the /new queue when both were at 2 points. I don't work for Amazon and never have. You see the exact same pattern during Apple's conferences, Microsoft's conferences, etc.
- jasonlotito 11y agoSo rather than just down vote this comment and the others, I'm going to point you to this guideline: "Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think a story is spam or off-topic, flag it by clicking on its "flag" link. (Not all users will see this; there is a karma threshold.) If you think a comment is egregious, click on its timestamp to go to its page, then click "flag" at the top." If you have an issue with the content, commenting on it is not the solution. In fact, by commenting like you did, you are doing the wrong thing. You are becoming the problem you want to avoid. Please use the tools available to you. Thanks!
- anton_gogolev 11y agoAnd again, no Mercurial. Have we lost?
- chii 11y agoHg seems to have lost the SCM war (of popularity) unfortunately - i quite like hg.
- anton_gogolev 11y agoSame here. I think if it was not for the convoluted Revlog [1] format (which makes it impossible to do a clean-room reimplementation of Mercurial Core), we could see a bit more of adoption by having third-party libraries to interface with Hg repositories. It _might_ have been one of the reasons Git, not Mercurial, was added to TFS [2]. 1: https://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/RevlogNG https://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/RevlogNG 2: https://hglabhq.com/blog/2014/1/17/mercurial-support-in-tfs-declined https://hglabhq.com/blog/2014/1/17/mercurial-support-in-tfs-...
- hollerith 11y ago>if it was not for the convoluted Revlog [1] format (which makes it impossible to do a clean-room reimplementation of Mercurial Core), we could see a bit more of adoption Alternatively, we could see a bit more adoption if it were available under a more permissive license than the GPL.
- nhumrich 11y agoGit is also under GPL, so I am not sure how much of an argument that is.
- anton_gogolev 11y agoYou can theoretically reimplement Git Core by only referencing the documentation, which, according to some sources, does not "infect" the new code with GPL.
- iagooar 11y agoAmazon going into Github's and Gitlab's space. I wonder how they will react to this and how this might affect them.
- BinaryIdiot 11y agoI don't think they need to worry; AWS continues its potato quality UX with CodeCommit. Unless you're hard core into using git in terminal for practically everything I can't see this taking much if any business from the existing big players.
- aalbertson 11y agouhhh....yeah.....I would say the vast majority of devs in the non-MSFT space use terminal more than 99% of the time...
- tomschlick 11y agousing the terminal for staging lots of code, or comparing diffs is painful. i personally use sourcetree for that or open a PR on bitbucket/github
- BinaryIdiot 11y ago> I would say the vast majority of devs in the non-MSFT space use terminal more than 99% of the time That's a pretty bold claim. Do you have any data behind it? It's only anecdotal but in my experience it's almost the exact opposite; having worked in multiples of both MSFT and non-MSFT shops it seems like almost every one uses a UI to handle git. I don't blame them; it's not always easy visualizing all of the changes (in my opinion at least) just through a terminal window.
- aalbertson 11y agoSadly no, it was a terribly anecdotal claim with no official evidence to back it up. I guess the point behind my claim is what do you mean by "working with git"? To me it is about checking code in, diffing, etc... which most people I've ever worked with do from the terminal. Occasionally I'll see folks want a gui for diffs (not really surprising since it's kinda fugly from terminal), but do most of the "work" from term. So I suppose I shall digress and admit I committed a total failure at an internet statement on a decently technical forum. in the words of Homer.... doh!
- cevn 11y agoI'm a little confused. Why would I use this instead of Github?
- ceejayoz 11y agoBecause this'll integrate heavily with Amazon's other offerings in time. I'd expect click-to-deploy for Node apps to wind up in the interface fairly quickly.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- eric_h 11y agoOpsworks already has click-to-deploy. I imagine Elastic Beanstalk does too. Really, I think the benefits of amazon git hosting is that they'll be more resistant to failure than github is currently. Also I'd imagine companies with existing IAM account management structure and large teams would find this product somewhat attractive.
- aalbertson 11y agoLambda is pretty much there.
- rubiquity 11y agoI view this more like Heroku and how they have git servers. Sure, Heroku has git servers but isn't trying to be GitHub (a web interface over git and development communication in general). This appears to just be a convenience for deploying your code. Also, given Amazon's awful reputation for building UIs that people actually want to use, I doubt they could build something to compete with GitHub anyway.
- mindcrime 11y ago> I'm a little confused. Why would I use this instead of Github? I haven't actually done the math yet, but it looks like it may be more economical for large numbers of private repos. For Open Source projects, there's probably no reason to use this, but for companies and other organizations who want Git hosting for private code, it might make sense. And the IAM integration actually could be useful if you're already a heavy user of Amazon AWS services.
- bbrazil 11y agoPricing: https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/pricing/ $1 per user/month, with plenty of free storage (10GB) each. 2k git requests/month sounds a bit low though if you're doing anything automated. There is a good free tier.
- sirius87 11y agoI don't see myself switching to this, but I'm glad it exists. After Google Code was shut down, it was clear that GitHub would remain miles ahead of any competition, making it the default choice for most orgs. That worries me quite a bit.
- robotnoises 11y agoAgreed, and I'm glad companies like Amazon with deep pockets are deciding to jump into the pool with github, as adoption of these competing products are probably going to be very slow short of some sort of event like what happened with SourceForge.
- wylee 11y agoI mostly use GitHub these days (at work), but I think Bitbucket is pretty similar in terms of features and may even be better in some ways (e.g., I like Bitbucket's design better, and they give you unlimited private repos). I don't think you could say GitHub is miles ahead of Bitbucket, except maybe in terms of users. Regardless, I agree that more competition is good.
- sirius87 11y agoI meant miles ahead in terms of users, dev mindshare, and that special community feeling.
- quicksilver03 11y agoBitbucket seems cheaper than CodeCommit if you have repositories under 2GB. However, once you get over this size, for example with lots of binaries, Bitbucket stops being an option and CodeCommit looks very interesting. GitHub doesn't explicitly states that they will disable pushing once the repository size crosses a threshold, but I don't think that they will allow multi-gigabyte repositories either.
- gjtorikian 11y agoWe have a soft 2 GB limit: https://help.github.com/articles/what-is-my-disk-quota/ https://help.github.com/articles/what-is-my-disk-quota/ In reality this has been very much a non-issue. Users we contact are generally okay with not bloating repos, and we point out Releases / Git LFS as alternative places to store binaries / large assets.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- ppierald 11y agoThe one thing that is appealing to an "AWS shop" and something that GitHub and other services have a harder time emulating is the integration with IAM (user authentication and provisioning) and the CloudTrail (audit trails). For any reasonably sized organization, ensuring that users get provisioned / deprovisioned is a tricky, error-prone task. Having IAM as a single toggle is nice. Using their SAML integration into something like Okta, OneLogin, or other IaaS-providers ... even better. Getting user activity into centralized logging via CloudTrail (Splunk, Sumo, ELK, et al.) is best practice for security teams. AWS makes all of this pretty easy, but at a price.
- plicense 11y agoThat's not just it. They are planning to add post-receive hooks. Imagine doing a commit and writing a post-commit hook to auto-deploy to appropriate hosts or spawn up an EC2 instance to run integration tests.
- mangeletti 11y agoIn my opinion, GitHub has demonstrated how a good monopoly[1] can operate. They're quick to respond to problems, they act ethically for the most part, their pricing is a far-cry from the type of gouging most monopolies get away with, and their product continues to get better and better. GitHub also makes it easy for new developers to get started with Git, and their UI has many awesome features that keep getting better. As Peter Thiel would say, because they have a monopoly, they have money to spend on things (e.g., improving their product) other than competing themselves out of business. All that being said, where is the market gap that AWS seeks to fill, other than hosting of large-sized files (scientific / big data applications, etc.), and perhaps the user management, which I feel is a bit outmoded and cumbersome? 1. I think it's fair to say GitHub has a monopoly on paid Git hosting
- fineman 11y agoI don't think the only store in town selling widgets has a widget monopoly unless there's something preventing another store from selling widgets. Until then they're just first-movers. But I will agree about Github. They had time to build lock-in and didn't.
- mangeletti 11y agoA monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity[1], so it doesn't really matter that another provider could join the market. To be fair, GitHub is really part of an oligopoly, comprised of themselves, BitBucket, and GitLab, but the winner of a majority of market share in this situation is typically referred to as a monopoly, in the same sense that Google is referred to as a monopoly, despite the existence of Bing, Yahoo!, and other search engines. For context, according to Compete, GitHub had 24 times as many unique visits as BitBucket last month. GitLab has about half to one third the traffic of BitBucket. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
- fineman 11y agoFrom your reference, I think this supports the other meaning: > The verb "monopolise" refers to the process by which a company gains the ability to raise prices or exclude competitors. As I see it, without that ability to exclude, it's not a monopoly. In a market without lock-in, or lock-out depending on your PoV, I can start selling widgets at any time and will do so whenever your profit margin gets too sweet. You're competing against me even if I'm not actively selling yet.
- phragg 11y agoAmazon seriously needs a new front-end dev.
- clebio 11y agoI am logged in to AWS console and don't find CodeCommit. Am I missing something?