• purelynonfunctional@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It’s not, though. Git is a means of distributing content, not the content itself. The thing analogous to PornHub’s porn on GitHub is the source code in the repos hosted there, not Git itself.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      9 months ago

      Git is a DVCS. GitHub is a place where DVCS repositories are hosted. There are many other places where DVCS repositories can be hosted, but GitHub is the most famous one… Porn is a type of content. PornHub is a place where porn is hosted. There are many other places where porn can be hosted, but PornHub is the most famous one. It’s a pretty good analogy.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        There are many other places where DVCS repositories can be hosted

        I mean… Everyone that’s cloned the repo has a full copy of it. You could clone it directly off someone else if you wanted to.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Sure… and you could pass around porn on thumb drives. But, having a central website where you can browse public repos and clone the interesting ones is a pretty key part of Open Source / Free Software development.

          • dan@upvote.au
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            How many people use Github for discovery though? I usually find interesting projects through a search engine, through word of mouth, through posts on here, etc. at which point it doesn’t really matter where the repo is hosted. A lot of the useful projects I use aren’t even on Github.

            As far as I know, Gitea is current working on federation support, which will be great. It’d be like Lemmy where you can browse repos, submit issues, etc from one instance even if the repo is hosted at a different one. Git was really designed for a model like that, not for a centralized one.

    • CanadaPlus@futurology.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      If only there was a website called “StreamHub” or something.

      Honestly the content vs. characteristic method of delivery distinction is subtle enough this is still a great way of explaining.

      • purelynonfunctional@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Depends on to whom. If you’re explaining to your grandma, a small child, a co-worker, or a student under your tutelage, you probably don’t want an explanation that relies on reference to a porn site.

        And if you’re explaining to a novice developer or to an IT person who sometimes might have to work with Git, they deserve an explanation that leaves them with a basic understanding (or at least the names) of the kinds of things Git and GitHub are (VCSes and SCM forges, respectively), not just an inkling that GitHub is not unique in being ‘a place to host (some?) Git, whatever that is’.

        So… if you don’t mind that it suggests ‘GitHub is for uploading Git(s)’, that line is an okay way to teach ‘the difference between Git and GitHub’ to non-technical, non-elderly adults who don’t really need to know what Git is (and don’t work with you or study under you).

        That’s an explanation of pretty damn narrow usefulness, to put it generously.

        It is pithy and memorable, though.