zlacker

>>ig0r0+(OP)
Hi HN, I'm the CEO of GitHub. Everyone at GitHub is really excited about this announcement, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

We've wanted to make this change for the last 18 months, but needed our Enterprise business to be big enough to enable the free use of GitHub by the rest of the world. I'm happy to say that it's grown dramatically in the last year, and so we're able to make GitHub free for teams that don't need Enterprise features.

We also retained our Team pricing plan for people who need email support (and a couple of other features like code owners).

In general we think that every developer on earth should be able to use GitHub for their work, and so it is great to remove price as a barrier.

>>natfri+V2
Hi Nat, with Microsoft now owning Github, I'm really curious to know what the future holds for both Azure DevOps and Github?

I'm a user of both - Github for OSS, and Azure DevOps for private work. IMO, these areas are where they are best suited - pipelines in particular are really powerful in Azure DevOps, and user/permission management, AAD integration and integration with build agents are all excellent.

I really like Azure DevOps, but all this has me worried about it's future - do you know if it's going to continue to exist and be developed in tandem with Github?

>>Gordon+di
Both products have a bright future and millions of users, and so we're continuing to invest in both for the foreseeable future. We're also finding ways to improve integration between them, so people can use them together if they want to. GitHub Actions reuses a bunch of code from Pipelines under the hood, for example.

>>natfri+Ow
I get that you guys want to say that publicly, but let's be real. No company would invest a massive amount of money in a duplicate product. One product will eventually starve.

I guess it is up to us to guess. Anyone?

I see GitHub being the unmovable giant here. Microsoft is publicly developing on it, as opposed to Azure Dev Ops. It has a very large mind-share. More developers are willing to use it without having the Microsoft stigma that some nix people feel.

>>pknopf+5E
> No company would invest a massive amount of money in a duplicate product.

I don't mean to be rude, but have you worked at a very large company like Microsoft or Amazon or Google? Redundant products are par for the course because of the byzantine internal politics and funding structures of big companies.

>>spencz+6F
Big companies like Microsoft and Google like to burn products with little notice too.

>>m0xte+2J
...and small companies go under or radically morph their products.

There's this irrational demand vocal on social media that large corporations keep their products forever.