For recent events, you could look at stuff how VSCode is supposedly Open Source and yet fully ridded with spyware and also propietary plugins...
On github, having MS at the realm has certainly affected too how DMCA's and such are deal with vs the old Github.
I mean, online resources on other peoples' servers cost money.
A better law would be to forbid "free" offerings by companies. They all are fraudulent "free", since you pay a commercial entity with either money or data. And, corporate "free" rarely stays free.
(This also doesn't have to be a new law, but application of false and deceptive advertising relating to the FTC, around the term of "free".)
Edit: Found the rule, already in FTC's federal regs: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-B...
The gradual roll out of this change started with a blog post[0] and included in-app notifications for the owners of impacted groups on GitLab.com.
If the group owner did not log in during the in-app notification period, they were then emailed (the email you received today) notifying that the group was impacted.
[0] - https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2022/03/24/efficient-free-tier...
https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/repository/mirror/pu...
That said, it looks like the premium features are $29/mo or $99/mo per user regardless if you self-host it or take advantage of their managed SaaS offering. It's somewhat bizarre - there's a lot of costs associated with managing this on-site but no discount for that. I presume they feel that extra overhead cost to the customer of self-hosting breaks even with the perceived or actual added security value of self-managed installations.
I might be reading it wrong, but that's how I see the pricing presented here and associated pages: https://about.gitlab.com/install/ce-or-ee/
If anyone else remembers this incident and can link to a source that'd be great for my sanity.
Maybe similar to this: >>17214257
I do have a love-hate relationship with MS, but I don't love the fact that they own 80% of my stack (Yes, I know, my choice) between TypeScript, VSCode, NPM, Github, etc..
Also on VSCodium, it only fixes the telemetry bullshit, the custom LSP Plugins that microsoft keeps for themselves or whatever are not available there. so If you want to use for example copilot or other -microsoft official- plugins you can't do so on VSCodium
Also let's add the whole Github Copilot WhiteWashing non-FOSS proprietary code into anyone to steal. Basically breaking the current status quo in favour of the megacorps that can steal it all and respect no licenses
Not sure how frequently you're using GitLab but we recently updated our navigation. Feedback on the new nav is being collected here: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/409005
We've also invested heavily in AI features including Code Suggestions which is free for all users while in beta. You can read more about the AI features in GitLab here: https://about.gitlab.com/solutions/ai/
This incident was Casey Muratori raising an issue about Windows Terminal performance:
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362
https://twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1522471966929653761
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1687287343&dateRange=custom&...
https://www.itprotoday.com/windows-78/inside-story-how-microsofts-open-source-code-theft-was-discovered1) You can set up Github Actions to automatically close pull requests: https://github.com/marketplace/actions/close-pull-request
2) You can use "interaction limits" (in repository settings, under "moderation options") to limit repository interactions to collaborators. This can only be set for 6 months at a time, though, so you'll need to reactivate it periodically.
3) You can archive the project and unarchive it temporarily when making changes, disabling all activity on the fork.
This scheme is basically dumping, where you (a company) lower the price of your good and then flood the market to kill all competitors. Then when they're good and dead, you jack up the prices to extortionate levels and sit back and get piles of money, from people with no choice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)
The last big antitrust push we had was against Microsoft. And after the judge was replaced for improper communication during trial, MS and DoJ settled. Basically, was a huge case then "Oops nevermind".
i just logged in and there is no indication of any limit.
i had to step through every group to find out where the limit was reached.
turns out that there was one group that had two sub groups which added up to 5 members. at the group overview this is listed as "two" (for the two subgroups). it would be very helpful if the group overview (https://gitlab.com/dashboard/groups) would list the total number of people as well as flag every group where the limit is reached or crossed.
but, you say the limit is 5 people. in this group there are exactly 5 people, yet the warning claims 'Your top-level group is over the 5 user limit and has been placed in a read-only state.'
how can that be? 5 is more than 5?
it doesn't matter in my case because this is an old project no longer worked on, so read only is fine, and there is no need to act, but i think you need to work on your system because i am sure there will be more cases like that.
lastly i want to add that while that limit is fine for small businesses, it is an absolute disaster for FOSS projects. FOSS projects don't have the funding to pay for your service, so they won't. their only option is to leave. if any of my projects get any traction then i have no choice but to go look for a more FOSS friendly service. i thought gitlab was that, i wanted to make a point against github and support their most likely competitor by drawing attention to you.
gitlab really does not gain anything by enforcing this limit for FOSS projects. FOSS projects often have many members that are not very active. a busy startup with 5 members probably creates the same activity and uses the same resources as a FOSS project with 50 members because most of those 50 members rarely contribute to the project.
or instead of limiting members, limit how often the more expensive resources are used. like limiting how often the CI is running.
i urge you to consider to allow a higher limit for groups that only have projects that use a FOSS license.
[1] https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2016/07/20/gitlab-is-open-core...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft
What surprises me is that the tech crowd is so ready to bend over for one of the worst companies on the planet in the software domain. These are the very same people that abused the legal system in every way that they could in order to slow down the adoption rate of open source. They are still doing this today but quietly, for instance by incentivizing municipalities and other government layers to use their software (for free if necessary) just to stop adoption of equivalent open source solutions.