
GitHub Firewall Install (your own github) - soundsop
http://fi.github.com/
======
SwellJoe
The GitHub guys are just iterating and growing so fast. I'd hate to be
SourceForge right about now (it seems to have caused the SF.net folks to wake
up, though, as they've begun to improve at a very rapid clip).

I ordinarily recommend folks _not_ go the installable application route (even
though our business is all installable based) if they can avoid it, but I
think it definitely makes sense for GitHub. It's an area where the prices are
very high, and the products are generally pretty bad.

~~~
timdorr
SF woke up a bit around the time Google Code project hosting was released. But
with GitHub and BitBucket kicking things up a notch, it's definitely a bad
time to be SF. And despite all their changes, it still feels like a pain to
use SF.net.

------
markbao
How do you guys do code obfuscation and allow your service to be packaged into
a downloadable, well, package?

One of my startups is thinking about doing something of the sort, for academic
institutions to throw our software on their own servers.

~~~
ridruejo
It is JRuby based, so it is compiled to Java bytecodes. It is packaged using a
BitRock custom stack that is a superset of BitNami JRuby Stack.

~~~
davidw
Hey, nice to see you here, and congrats on this win for BitRock:-)

------
burke
So roughly how much would this cost for a small team, say <10? I'm assuming
far too much for me, since it's not visible anywhere, but I'm still curious :)

~~~
pjhyett
How much are you willing to pay? :) Seriously, though, it's probably priced
beyond what most small teams could afford, but it's on a per-company basis
which is why we're not posting prices.

GitHub:FI was really built with large customers in mind, places with tens to
hundreds of developers bridled with restrictions that prevent them from
hosting their code on GitHub.com.

There's no reason smaller companies can't use it, but for the time being we
want to dedicate more attention and support to fewer well-paying customers.

We may offer a pricing model in the future that's more affordable for smaller
teams, but I can't state emphatically enough that if your team doesn't have
the type of restrictions mentioned earlier, you should absolutely be using
GitHub.com.

~~~
ankhmoop
I mentioned this in another comment, but I just wanted to note that even as a
very small company, we tend to avoid solutions that won't readily integrate
with our existing LDAP users and group-based access control, backup system,
single-sign-on, etc.

Not using web services has less to do with being bridled corporate
restrictions and more to do with preferring to use our nice, fully automated
infrastructure. Hosting another small java servlet isn't going to make us
break a sweat -- it'll be less work than trying to maintain user accounts and
access controls across another web service.

For this reason, we solely use products that drop right into our standing
infrastructure. I don't think we're too unusual in this, although we may be
amongst the HN sample set.

------
pjhyett
Here's our launch post explaining FI:

<http://github.com/blog/441-launch-github-firewall-install>

~~~
timdorr
Awesome job, PJ and team. I first heard about this at Startup Riot 2009 when
Chris came to speak.

Although, my initial concern is how this is being spun to customers in terms
of customization. One of my design clients is a SaaS vendor that had a large
potential customer request an on-site deployment of their big product. Along
with packaging up their software for a remote deployment, the customer was
asking for all kinds of modifications to match up with their very particular
needs. This was sort of spreading them thin on what they could work on for the
customer and for the core product. So, my question is are you going to provide
customization options for purchasers, or is the product just a rebuilt copy of
whatever state the GitHub code is at? I'm a fan of what you guys have built,
so I'd hate to see it suffer.

------
tannerburson
I think one of the most exciting points here is that they were able to get one
of the most popular Rails applications running on JRuby without too much
apparent hassle. Hopefully we'll hear a bit more from them about this process
and how it went, but this is an exciting announcement for the Ruby community!

------
pieter
Does it do custom branding? I might've missed this, but I don't think the
video mentioned it. Gitorious does that rather nicely (see
<http://qt.gitorious.org/>), but your repositories will still be hosted
somewhere else.

~~~
pilif
gitorious is a real bitch to install though.

and githubs user centric way of looking at things is much more compelling than
the project centric way of gitorious.

------
jemmons
I'm really excited by this, but I'd love to hear some guidance on pricing. Is
this for hacker shops like mine, or for the IBMs of the world?

~~~
jim-greer
I think it's for the IBMs of the world, that won't allow 3rd party hosted
services... most small companies are fine with it.

~~~
ankhmoop
We're not an IBM, but tend to avoid solutions that won't readily integrate
with our existing LDAP users and group-based access control, backup system,
etc.

------
menloparkbum
this is really cool, but I couldn't help but notice this quote:

 _“Killer apps makes or breaks any platform. With GitHub, I think the Git hub
just scored one.”_ -DHH

Um. I know DHH is an important guy, but not only is that quote grammatically
way out there, I don't think it makes any sense at all...

~~~
kirubakaran
[this is how I interpreted it. makes perfect sense imho]

 _'Killer apps' make a platform. Lack of 'killer apps' break a platform.
GitHub is Git community's (=hub) killer app._

------
Kalimotxo
I would love to use this in my development group. Unfortunately, I don't think
we will be able to justify the cost.

------
buggy_code
what's the best open source alternative to git hub? (no, I don't want to host
my code on third party servers)

the best I've used so far is trac, but their git support were flaky when I
last tested it (only ran well with svn at the time)

~~~
cduan
I've been happily using Gitosis for quite a while now. It's like Github
without the web interface (so it manages central repositories and user
authentication).

I recall it took a bit of finagling to set it up, but I haven't had a single
issue with it since. It's also cool that the configuration files are stored in
a Git repository (once you try it, it will be clear how that works).

[http://scie.nti.st/2007/11/14/hosting-git-repositories-
the-e...](http://scie.nti.st/2007/11/14/hosting-git-repositories-the-easy-and-
secure-way)

------
whalesalad
This is one of the main reasons that I'm not using Git at work, there hasn't
been a super solid way to get the Github functionality on an internal network
where it's 100% secure. This is a REALLY smart move for the guys at Github.

~~~
inklesspen
You can use Git without Github, you know.

~~~
whalesalad
Yees, but these folks aren't early adopters. A lot of the people here don't
even use (or approve of) key based SSH logins =/

------
icefox
In the demo \- They show a license agreement, but I don't seem to see it
online to view and review. \- X86 only? \- Hopefully the password scott put in
isn't the one he uses everywhere :)

