zlacker

>>linker+(OP)
The two subject repos are:

  https://github.com/Andre0512/hon
  https://github.com/Andre0512/pyhOn

Make whatever use of that information you will before the takedown occurs.

>>sokolo+xa
If people fork the repo, would they also be sent a takedown?

>>Action+Ef
If you fork it, do a proper git clone and git push. Github can and has DMCAed direct forks in the past.

>>aaomid+xg
At the risk of asking a dumb question, what does a git push do for you there? (Fully agree on the clone locally point.)

>>sokolo+ah
It's not marked as a fork in their systems. Instead, it's as if you'd written a bunch of code in a local repository and then pushed it to GitHub.

It could still be identified as the same codebase by eg. comparing commit hashes or content hashes, but that's harder. If you really want to be sure, clone the repository, make a few local edits to files (eg. adding a comment to each file), copy the full source repository to a new directory in the filesystem, git init that as a new repository, commit changes, and push. That blows away all the existing history of commits, and ensures that each file has a different hash. It's still technically possible to detect it as a dupe, but would require an extremely expensive shingling or filesystem diff on every repository in GitHub.

>>nostra+7l
> It's still technically possible to detect it as a dupe, but would require an extremely expensive shingling or filesystem diff on every repository in GitHub.

Wouldn't a GitHub search still find it pretty easily? As I understand it, they put significant effort into supporting search; but since that's being done anyway, it doesn't have a very high marginal cost.