isaacs

github

OPEN SOURCE2013–2026

isaacs / github · Archived

github

Just a place to track issues and feature requests that I have for github

Explore on GitHub Read Hacker News discussions

87Distinct people

101Mentions

0Explicit recommenders

2.2KGitHub stars

REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Just a place to track issues and feature requests that I have for github

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 10:02:42 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year101 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2013-06-04 17:52:47 UTC to 2026-04-29 03:42:11 UTC.

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges

UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
Period	Start (UTC)	End (exclusive, UTC)	Mentions	Submissions	Comments
2013	2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	4	3	1
2014	2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	9	3	6
2015	2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	13	5	8
2016	2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	18	3	15
2017	2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	7	2	5
2018	2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	15	3	12
2019	2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	7	1	6
2020	2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	9	4	5
2021	2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	9	4	5
2022	2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	3	0	3
2023	2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	5	1	4
2024	2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	0	0	0
2025	2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	1	0	1
2026 (partial)	2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC	1	0	1

From the project README

An excerpt from the repository, fetched Nov 13, 2026.

Read the project’s introduction

IMPORTANT NOTE: GITHUB NOW HAS AN OFFICIAL FEEDBACK REPOSITORY. OPEN A DISCUSSION THERE TO ASK QUESTIONS OR DISCUSS BUGS. THIS REPO IS DEPRECATED. Issues for GitHub What this repository is about This is not the actual repository for the GitHub website. I'm not affiliated with GitHub in any way, except that I use it all day long, and almost all my code is hosted there. UPDATE: as of April 2020, with the acquisition of npm, Inc. by GitHub, I am a GitHub employee. I remain focused on the npm/cli project, and any opinions expressed here belong to the person expressing them at the time they were expressed, and should not be taken as official GitHub policy in any way. I still use GitHub all day long, and almost all my code is still hosted there. Issues and feature requests posted to GitHub are not stored in any publicly available location, so I find that I quickly lose track of the things that I've sent them. For GitHubbers If you are a GitHubber, and you would like to respond and close issues on this repository, please let me (or one of the other collaborators) know, and we'll add you as a collaborator. Alternatively, you could use some secret GitHub internal APIs to get access, if you have such things. If you want to know what people are asking for or ask for them to provide details about use cases. Then head over to the issues list. If you have an issue or feature request for GitHub Search for existing issues If you did not find any existing issue for your topic, post a new issue Additionally, please email support@github.com because this repo is strictly for our own (unofficial) tracking purposes. Make sure to send GitHub the issue URL at the end of the message so that they can more easily find updates and further comments here. If GitHub replies, (and they usually do, quickly) and if it is not a confidential matter like a security disclosure, add their reply to the issue so that other users know what their official response was. Upvoting existing issues Upvote existing issues with thumbs up 👍. Please do not add +1 comments. If you merely want to +1 an issue (isaacs/github#9), please also send an email to support@github.com to register your interest. Be sure to include a link to the tracking issue that was filed. See more in CONTRIBUTING.md Issue closing policy Issues will only be closed once GitHub implements / fixes them, or explicitly says WONTFIX, which almost never happens nowadays. Issues may take a long time (forever) to be fixed, so make sure that you are ready to keep them around on your /issues list for a long time. See also Dear GitHub Statement of Intent This repository is created in a spirit of positive intent and community good will. I have more love in my heart for GitHub than anyone probably ought to for any website. They've changed the face of open source, and enabled amazing things to happen. I've personally benefited quite a bit from those amazing things, and my life is much better as a direct result. I'm very thankful to GitHub, and the great work they do. When I shake my fists in frustration, it's only because they are so good that I spend countless hours being productive on their website, and even minor problems seem to jump out. Trolling, disparaging remarks about GitHub, or even just unproductive kvetching, will not be tolerated. Those comments will be deleted and the users blocked. We're here to help each other, and the company that does so much for us. <3 --isaacs

Read the full README on GitHub

What Hacker News says

5 sources

jomar·Oct 16, 2023

Probably the older email address is still the primary one for the GitHub account. GitHub took it upon themselves to change email addresses and author names when merging via the UI buttons like "Squash and Merge" in 2018 and then again in 2019. See <https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1368> for the tedious details. Essentially the post-2019 behaviour seems to be that where possible with "Squash and Merge" they will set noreply@github as the committer so that they can sign the merged commit themselves, and set author name & email to what they have recorded for the GH account involved (and the signature is then a record that GH have verified that account's involvement). Personally I think it is shocking that they ignore the name and email address that the actual author of the commit has selected. This is both a violation of the author's

Read the rest

intentions -- for example, you may set work and personal email addresses in different repositories as discussed here, but GitHub will rewrite them all to the same thing when other people press "Squash and Merge" on your pull requests -- and potentially a doxxing security risk. I have considered re-reporting this to GitHub via the newer community discussions or via support again, but given the extent to which they've ignored all such reports over the last five years it is hard to find the motivation to do so.

In Organizing multiple Git identities

jomar·Oct 16, 2023

Having said that, given that many people do use separate GitHub accounts for their separate private and work personas, and many organisations seemingly expect their employees to do so, perhaps GitHub could consider revising this Terms of Service restriction to better reflect reality. There have also been times when I would like to have access to a second GitHub account for testing purposes. (In particular, for testing GH behaviour when the accounts corresponding to PR commits, PR creator, and PR merger all differ -- see for example <https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1368>.)

In Organizing multiple Git identities

bondarchuk·Sep 1, 2023Submission

GitHub prevents crawling of repository's Wiki pages – no Google search

4 points · Open discussion

B8MGHCBekDuRi·Feb 14, 2023

> Hi, people have made money using my code and I also don’t care looks like everyone's missing the point. > I understand this is upsetting to you Again, maybe I am on another level of comprehension, so I don't understanda why it is so hard for someone to get it, but I am not upset by that, at all. I simply know that those who think "it will be fine" are delusional and don't know what they are talking about! So I just will paste some link to relevant news here, maybe it will make things clearer. It includes the opinion of Antirez, father of one of the most successful OSS ever: Redis. Maybe his words will open your eyes and tear the veil of Maya. (spoiler ahead alert!) Basically you work for free and people don't even thank you and the maintainer ends up being doxed or blamed or pushed aside and in the long term the only solution to keep

Read the rest

sanity is to resign https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2022/burden-open-source-ma... https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/13/opensource_apacheplc4... https://nolanlawson.com/2017/03/05/what-it-feels-like-to-be-... https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/z14tt2/reason_why_op... https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/167 http://web.archive.org/web/20221217180915/http://antirez.com... > But I don’t see how the GPL is a viable solution to that problem. Not at all GPL doesn't permit freeloading, that's how Do you wanna know who the freeloaders are? Just make a list of companies that do not accept GPL code. Those are the free loaders. For people it's even simpler: you don't want to contribute to the project because it's GPL? then you are a freeloader. Which is not the same of saying that if someone creates a project under Apache license he's a freeloader. There are many reasons to start a project under more permissive licenses, but if you plan to write something that has chances of being successful, think about what you're doing and who got your back. It's one thing to create Go and make it opensource with Google backing you, another entirely to maintain log4j or GPG or OpenSSH on your free time for years or decades, without even a thank you and people constantly opening issue like "this thing is shit it should be rewritten in Rust" or "this project doesn't have a COC/ the COC is not inclusive enough I will blame you all over the internet" etc. etc. My Apache/BSD projects are under that license because I know it's code that will be used in a context where GPL would not be accepted, but I also refuse to offer any kind of support whatsoever, basically once you get it, it's yours, I won't even close your issues, I will simply ignore them, that's how much I care about it. Because I don't care to work on stuff that people are not forced to contribute back to, unless it's for myself. Need a feature? Show me the money and I will think about implementing it. > . Not at all. More likely, if I release my code under the GPL not only won’t I get paid, but also nobody will use my software textbook straw man you will get paid in code. Linux is GPL, Vim is GPL, Emacs is GPL, GCC is GPL, Gnome is GPL, KDE is GPL, OpenJDK is GPL, Telegram is GPL, VLC is GPL, Blender is GPL, uBlock Origin is GPL, etc. etc. it's notorious that nobody uses them...

In Reimplementing the Coreutils in a modern language (Rust)

Aissen·Jan 31, 2023

It was publicly known that Github was breaking automatic git archives consistency for many years. Here is a bug on a project to stop relying on fake github archives (as opposed to stable git-archive(1)): https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3099 At some point it was impossible to go a few weeks (or even days) without a github archive change (depending on which part of the "CDN" you hit), I guess they must have stabilized it at some point. Here is an old issue before GitHub had a community issue tracker: https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1483 I am glad this is getting more attention, maybe now github will finally have a stable endpoint for archives.

In Git archive checksums may change