

2 out of 3 GitHub forks are completely empty - cool-RR
http://blog.garlicsim.org/post/4472104984/2-out-of-3-github-forks-are-completely-empty

======
dacort
Just because the repository is empty doesn't mean the forkers didn't modify
the code. I've forked many a project, modified it locally, and not pushed it
back up for a variety of reasons not limited to: laziness, abandonment, and
shameful code that somebody would likely write a scornful blog post about. ;)

~~~
tednaleid
I've done this too. Let's me create a github repo where "master" is fixed at a
known version (to me) and I can clone it to any machine without worrying about
remembering a the hash for the tag I want. I can push/pull at will and merge
in changes from upstream whenever I desire. Sometimes local changes stay
local, sometimes they get pushed out.

Github and Bitbucket aren't only for working on code with other people, they
also let us consume projects at the rate that we want to consume them.

------
josegonzalez
Unfortunately, this "research" is flawed. If you pull in changes just right,
the network view does not show the forks as branch off. I believe cherry-
picking commits does this, and rebasing onto those commits may also do the
same. Feel free to correct me, but that's been my personal experience.

~~~
cool-RR
So... someone could make a fork, contribute code, and then not have his name
shown on the Network view? Does this happen to actual contributors?

~~~
albertzeyer
The network view is not really intended to give a complete list of all
contributors. It is intended to show the network of the different
branches/forks. And it shows only a small time window (starting with the most
recent time). So if there were commits earlier by other people and they were
merged in, you will probably not see them.

I think under commits, the contributors list should be the requested
information.

~~~
cool-RR
I'm pretty sure that the Network view is complete. I have around 3,000 commits
over 2 years and they're all listed in my Network view:

<https://github.com/cool-RR/GarlicSim/network>

~~~
josegonzalez
Thats not the same as you pulling in the commit in some way that obscures the
contribution. I've done so on quite a few repositories (and I have enough
repositories that all sorts of git nonsense has been tried). The big thing I
try to conserve is attribution; I am not always the author of a changeset and
I like to give credit where credit is due.

That said, you can also delete a commit from the Network view by issuing the
command "git push -f". So no, I can't credibly say all your commits are
listed, although I would hope you don't commit that unholy sin.

------
16s
I think some people fork because they just want a copy of it in case it goes
away. That's what I've been told at least.

~~~
jonursenbach
Last I remember, on Github, when you delete a repository any forked
repositories are also deleted.

~~~
tlrobinson
Really?! That seems incorrect. I don't want my code disappearing because
someone deleted their repository.

~~~
jonursenbach
Well let's test it. <https://github.com/jonursenbach/fork-this>

Fork it, commit something to your fork and I'll delete my repo.

~~~
izak30
challenge accepted: <https://github.com/issackelly/fork-this/file-edit/>

~~~
jonursenbach
Deleted my repo. Looks like your fork is still alive and no longer marked as a
fork.

~~~
izak30
confirmed

