
AWS CodeCommit - rjsamson
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-available-aws-codecommit/
======
mangeletti
In my opinion, GitHub has demonstrated how a good monopoly[1] can operate.
They're quick to respond to problems, they act ethically for the most part,
their pricing is a far-cry from the type of gouging most monopolies get away
with, and their product continues to get better and better. GitHub also makes
it easy for new developers to get started with Git, and their UI has many
awesome features that keep getting better.

As Peter Thiel would say, because they have a monopoly, they have money to
spend on things (e.g., improving their product) other than competing
themselves out of business.

All that being said, where is the market gap that AWS seeks to fill, other
than hosting of large-sized files (scientific / big data applications, etc.),
and perhaps the user management, which I feel is a bit outmoded and
cumbersome?

1\. I think it's fair to say GitHub has a monopoly on paid Git hosting

~~~
mindcrime
> 1\. I think it's fair to say GitHub has a monopoly on paid Git hosting

I don't know... depends on how precisely you want to define "monopoly".
Bitbucket are certainly popular in some circles. We use them here at Mammoth
Data, as their pricing model is more economical for what we do.

~~~
kaishiro
Yeah, this is a fair point. Anecdotally, most of the agencies I've worked with
use Bitbucket due to their pricing being based around users as opposed to the
number of private repos - the lock-in becomes even tighter if they're running
JIRA. Github's private repo limit even on organizational accounts can become
constricting pretty quickly.

------
ppierald
The one thing that is appealing to an "AWS shop" and something that GitHub and
other services have a harder time emulating is the integration with IAM (user
authentication and provisioning) and the CloudTrail (audit trails). For any
reasonably sized organization, ensuring that users get provisioned /
deprovisioned is a tricky, error-prone task. Having IAM as a single toggle is
nice. Using their SAML integration into something like Okta, OneLogin, or
other IaaS-providers ... even better. Getting user activity into centralized
logging via CloudTrail (Splunk, Sumo, ELK, et al.) is best practice for
security teams. AWS makes all of this pretty easy, but at a price.

~~~
plicense
That's not just it. They are planning to add post-receive hooks. Imagine doing
a commit and writing a post-commit hook to auto-deploy to appropriate hosts or
spawn up an EC2 instance to run integration tests.

------
sirius87
I don't see myself switching to this, but I'm glad it exists. After Google
Code was shut down, it was clear that GitHub would remain _miles_ ahead of any
competition, making it the default choice for most orgs. That worries me quite
a bit.

~~~
wylee
I mostly use GitHub these days (at work), but I think Bitbucket is pretty
similar in terms of features and may even be better in some ways (e.g., I like
Bitbucket's design better, and they give you unlimited private repos). I don't
think you could say GitHub is _miles_ ahead of Bitbucket, except maybe in
terms of users.

Regardless, I agree that more competition is good.

~~~
sirius87
I meant _miles ahead_ in terms of users, dev mindshare, and that special
_community feeling_.

------
quicksilver03
Bitbucket seems cheaper than CodeCommit if you have repositories under 2GB.
However, once you get over this size, for example with lots of binaries,
Bitbucket stops being an option and CodeCommit looks very interesting.

GitHub doesn't explicitly states that they will disable pushing once the
repository size crosses a threshold, but I don't think that they will allow
multi-gigabyte repositories either.

~~~
gjtorikian
We have a soft 2 GB limit: [https://help.github.com/articles/what-is-my-disk-
quota/](https://help.github.com/articles/what-is-my-disk-quota/)

In reality this has been very much a non-issue. Users we contact are generally
okay with not bloating repos, and we point out Releases / Git LFS as
alternative places to store binaries / large assets.

------
bbrazil
Pricing:
[https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/pricing/](https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/pricing/)

$1 per user/month, with plenty of free storage (10GB) each. 2k git
requests/month sounds a bit low though if you're doing anything automated.
There is a good free tier.

------
anton_gogolev
And again, no Mercurial. Have we lost?

~~~
nickysielicki
My question is how long is GitHub will remain a git-only platform?

It seems only natural to me that they should branch out. (heh... branch)

~~~
anton_gogolev
Having invested so much into Git-oriented projects and whatnot, I think they
will remain Git-only till the heat death of the universe.

And then again, Hg repositories on _Git_ Hub?

~~~
giancarlostoro
Unless one day they rebrand their name like "genius" did, maybe codehub or
something.

------
phragg
Amazon seriously needs a new front-end dev.

------
iagooar
Amazon going into Github's and Gitlab's space. I wonder how they will react to
this and how this might affect them.

~~~
BinaryIdiot
I don't think they need to worry; AWS continues its potato quality UX with
CodeCommit. Unless you're hard core into using git in terminal for practically
everything I can't see this taking much if any business from the existing big
players.

~~~
aalbertson
uhhh....yeah.....I would say the vast majority of devs in the non-MSFT space
use terminal more than 99% of the time...

~~~
BinaryIdiot
> I would say the vast majority of devs in the non-MSFT space use terminal
> more than 99% of the time

That's a pretty bold claim. Do you have any data behind it?

It's only anecdotal but in my experience it's almost the exact opposite;
having worked in multiples of both MSFT and non-MSFT shops it seems like
almost every one uses a UI to handle git. I don't blame them; it's not always
easy visualizing all of the changes (in my opinion at least) just through a
terminal window.

~~~
aalbertson
Sadly no, it was a terribly anecdotal claim with no official evidence to back
it up. I guess the point behind my claim is what do you mean by "working with
git"? To me it is about checking code in, diffing, etc... which most people
I've ever worked with do from the terminal. Occasionally I'll see folks want a
gui for diffs (not really surprising since it's kinda fugly from terminal),
but do most of the "work" from term.

So I suppose I shall digress and admit I committed a total failure at an
internet statement on a decently technical forum.

in the words of Homer....

doh!

------
clebio
I am logged in to AWS console and don't find CodeCommit. Am I missing
something?

~~~
lenova
us-east-1 only perhaps?

~~~
lenova
Oooh, Jeff Barr states that it'll take a few hours to appear on the web
console:
[https://twitter.com/jeffbarr/status/619155748392583168](https://twitter.com/jeffbarr/status/619155748392583168)

------
cevn
I'm a little confused. Why would I use this instead of Github?

~~~
ceejayoz
Because this'll integrate heavily with Amazon's other offerings in time. I'd
expect click-to-deploy for Node apps to wind up in the interface fairly
quickly.

~~~
eric_h
Opsworks already has click-to-deploy. I imagine Elastic Beanstalk does too.

Really, I think the benefits of amazon git hosting is that they'll be more
resistant to failure than github is currently.

Also I'd imagine companies with existing IAM account management structure and
large teams would find this product somewhat attractive.

------
zxcvcxz
It looks like we're talking about these new AWS features whether we want to or
not..

~~~
dangrossman
We're talking about them because HN users submitted the stories and other HN
users voted them up.

~~~
zxcvcxz
Strange they both have the exact same number of upvotes (about 1 per minute
too) and one was posted by an amazon employee. Not like there's ever been a
corporate shill thread on HN...

edit: and look, we have a new user who just created an account to say they
were "eagerly waiting for this!" on the other thread:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pragar](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=pragar)

~~~
BinaryIdiot
> and look, we have a new user who just created an account to say he was
> waiting for this on the other thread

Maybe he or she was waiting for this? Why does everything need to be a
conspiracy to promote corporate America? Granted you could be right but I'd
bet on the simple reason first (someone submitted it and it was upvoted).

~~~
zxcvcxz
Yeah, you're probably right. Just a funny coincidence.

