undefined | Better HN

0 pointssireat2y ago0 comments

Overall LFS feels a very hacky tacked on solution with warts.

Git LFS is horrible if you mistakenly add some file(s) to LFS.

Restoring to LFS-less state is supposed to be easy but it is always very painful.

There should be a way to tell repo - I do not want any LFS at all. In practice this is painful, and it is easier to start a new repo....

Also for some reason Github/Microsoft decided to "monetize" LFS. The freebie limits are 1GB for hosting AND transfer! Then the charges get very expensive.

I am not sure why Github LFS is priced like some AWS S3 plan not OneDrive plan.

0 comments

vtbassmatt2y ago

GitHub charges for LFS and has since they initially introduced it, way before Microsoft was involved. Also, the pricing model is changing and will include a minimum of 10GiB for free (250GiB for Team/Enterprise customers). It’s cost-recovery and abuse-prevention, though, not some nefarious scheme. And funny you mention AWS S3... what costs might GitHub be recovering? ;)

Microsoft’s homegrown LFS implementation (in Azure DevOps) does not and has never charged for LFS. It’s nice to have friends with a cloud blob storage service!

Source: I was the product manager for Azure Repos’s LFS server and am currently the product manager for all things Git at GitHub.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

vtbassmatt2y ago

Microsoft’s homegrown LFS implementation (in Azure DevOps) does not and has never charged for LFS. It’s nice to have friends with a cloud blob storage service!

Source: I was the product manager for Azure Repos’s LFS server and am currently the product manager for all things Git at GitHub.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse