• blotz@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 months ago

    Can someone explain to me why github apparently has bad UX/UI? I always thought the UI has gotten really good over the years.

    [Edit] Like there this huge argument in these comments about the release button being all wrong. ??? No clue what people have against it. I thought it was fine? You can use it or not. People link to it if they want it more prominent. Someone explain?

    • pachrist@lemmy.world
      0·
      9 months ago

      I find that when you know how to use Github, Github is pretty easy and close to perfect for what it is, a code repository.

      I think that most people who stumble across a Github link through a Google search, probably like in the original post, want to treat it like an app store. The read.me is the description, so they can tell it kind of does what they need, but they’re missing a big, green download and install button.

    • drengbarazi@lemmy.world
      0·
      9 months ago

      Around last year or the year before that they changed the placement of that button, never really given much thought about it tbf. Just a minor annoyance.

      But yeah it was like in the same top row as the code/issues/pull-requests/wiki pages. Now you can only access it from the code page inside a lateral panel. Before that you could just jump to the releases from the wiki page, as an example.

  • RustyNova@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 months ago

    From someone in computer networking classes: “I don’t use GitHub. This is too complicated” Like bruh. The instructions are right there in the readme.

    There’s also the time where we were asked to read temperature from a sensor, and everyone went straight to chatgpt. Meanwhile, first search result, full repo with full noob instructions.

    • fidodo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      Computer networking was the most complicated class I took. How can GitHub be too complicated compared to the class? Or is it a non low level computer networking class?

      • RustyNova@lemmy.world
        0·
        9 months ago

        This is literally the third year of the diploma. This is not even source control. This is literally installing the software provided with the instructions provided

        But as I seen both, networking is easier than programming IMO. Networking is mostly knowing a lot of things to be able to reuse that knowledge Programming is actually creating things and solutions to problems, and is more complicated, at least for me. But I still prefer it as I actually feel mentally challenged (pun intended)

        • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
          0·
          9 months ago

          My personal issue with github is more the placement of the actual download links, sometimes its harder to find than the real download button on a dodgy pirate site without ad-block.

      • Kostyeah@lemmy.ca
        0·
        9 months ago

        As a CS student, yes absolutely. These people then complain about paper exams and when the code gets complex enough for the AI to make mistakes. I’ve seen a few people drop out in programming 2, and my web 1 class was decimated because we were doing more than leetcode exercises. It’s a real problem that so many people are using it as a crutch.

        • thisisnotgoingwell@programming.dev
          0·
          8 months ago

          I’m not a developer but I write a lot of code for network infrastructure automation… when I started learning I was already a network engineer so I figured it would be a cakewalk. I think it takes a certain type of person (patience, persistence, tenacity, etc) to excel in a computer science field. I’d reckon a lot of young people think the jobs are all pretty sweet and cushy

        • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
          0·
          9 months ago

          I’m neither surprised nor unsurprised. I’m middle aged and don’t have much insight into what university students are doing day to day.

  • SavvyWolf@pawb.socialEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    TBF, they could probably make the “releases” page more prominent rather than having it buried in all the “code” stuff.

    • Ephera@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      Worst part is that this used to be a separate tab in the repo navigation. I still cannot conceive of a reason why they would move it from there to some random heading in the middle of the screen, except maybe so they can sell more GitHub trainings.

    • Crow@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      After downloading code from GitHub for years I can still take over a minute finding the file I want to download at times. Now that’s not long, but it’s why I’m there 90% of the time.

      • lunarul@lemmy.world
        0·
        9 months ago

        If you use it as a developer you don’t care about the releases page. You want to see the code and for latest version you just need the git tags. But I’ve also used it for stuff I just needed to run on my machine as an end-user. And for those you turn to the Releases page. That’s where pre-built binaries go.

        But it also depends on the target audience. Some projects, even if meant more as software to run than code to import, still target mainly developers or tech users in general and will not have more than just instructions on how to build them. Others, say a Minecraft launcher, or some console emulator, will target a wider audience and provide a good Releases page with binaries for multiple platforms.

    • Bappity@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      TRUE. the first time I used GitHub, the releases tab being all the way at the bottom in the mobile view confused me for a good while

          • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
            0·
            9 months ago

            Comparing bad to bad doesn’t make any of them better lol

            I’ve gone nuts trying to download a single file from the git website on my first interactions with it (because somehow adding a download file button when you’re viewing a file on the site is just too much to handle)

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            0·
            9 months ago

            It’s not black and white. I actually liked a few things better about bit buckets UI. It’s been too long to remember specifics though I think it was concerning PRs and diffs. I still think GitHubs review UI is too complicated. It took me literally years to fully understand it.

          • fury@lemmy.world
            0·
            9 months ago

            I’m not so sure. I seem to be able to find my way around a GitLab project in much fewer moves than a GitHub project. But maybe I’m biased because I use it all the time at work. I know they change the sidebar a lot, though.

      • Malix@sopuli.xyz
        0·
        9 months ago

        not only the ux, some devs make it absurdly confusing to find a binary.

        I don’t want to throw anyone under the bus, but there’s this one niche app.

        their github releases at one point were YEARS out of date, they only linked to the current version in seemingly random issue reports’ comments. And the current versions were some daily build artefacts you could find in a navigation tree many clicks deep in some unrelated website. And you’d better be savvy enough to download a successfully built artefact too. And even then the downloaded .zip contained all kinds of fluff unnescessary for using the app.

        The app worked fine, sure, but actually obtaining it was fairly tricky, tbh.

        • Cow2@lemm.ee
          0·
          9 months ago

          These build artefacts probably weren’t meant for end users, that’s why they contained the “unnecessary fluff”.

          • Malix@sopuli.xyz
            0·
            9 months ago

            absolutely, but they were in general (IIRC) suggesting them for the main downloads, but just not telling anyone outside the comments, which was the weird part

      • r00ty@kbin.life
        0·
        9 months ago

        I’d agree, but the caveat is that github is primarily about an interface for source control and collaboration between developers for projects. The release page is really just an also-ran in terms of importance.

        • Anamana@feddit.de
          0·
          9 months ago

          Imo they aren’t even trying, because it’s not that hard to make it better. Doesn’t even have to be a compromise. Most people just need a visible download button for the programs, that’s all.

          • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
            0·
            9 months ago

            There is, it’s literally right there on the home page of the project. You can either copy a URL and download it by cloning the git repo, or you can download the whole project as a zip file. Then you just have to compile it!

            GitHub is for developers, not end users.

            • BatmanAoD@programming.dev
              0·
              9 months ago

              That’s not a download button for the program. But there is indeed a link to the release page right on the home page of the project, so you’re still correct.

            • Anamana@feddit.de
              0·
              9 months ago

              It’s not a compromise to make another download button for the last release as well. No one looses.

          • Scrollone@feddit.it
            0·
            8 months ago

            SourceForge had a better UX for those who just want to download software.

            And SF is horrible, so this says a lot.

          • llii@feddit.deEnglish
            0·
            9 months ago

            If that’s a concern for the project maintainers, they should create a homepage for the project with download links.

            • Ekky@sopuli.xyzEnglish
              0·
              9 months ago

              Or make a shortcut/link in the readme to the newest release of the most popular OS’s.

              A decent release page tends to contain all kinds of files for different OS, so ‘regular’ people who just want the .deb or .exe would likely become confused regardless.

              • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                0·
                9 months ago

                I mean, if you don’t even know what OS you’re on…

                Next you’re going to tell me cars need boosters so babies can reach the pedals… At a certain point, it becomes irresponsible to enable ignorance.

        • Anamana@feddit.de
          0·
          9 months ago

          It doesn’t have to be a compromise imo. Most people just need a visible download button on the front pages. Wouldn’t hurt devs at all. I mean, even devs sometimes struggle with this lol.

          • BetterDev@programming.dev
            0·
            9 months ago

            It doesn’t have to be a compromise

            You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

            Any change to appease you would be a compromise, you understand this, yes?

        • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
          0·
          9 months ago

          But if you want to put a some text and pictures in very specific locations and never worry about them suddenly jumping into random places, Excel is actually better than Word. That’s why people tend to use Excel for all sorts of weird purposes like that. Unlike with Word, things actually stay where you put them.

          • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
            0·
            9 months ago

            Yes and there are definitely people who use excel for art. Just like there are people who use GitHub for its releases page. It’s just not the primary use of either program.

        • Anamana@feddit.de
          0·
          9 months ago

          Do most people who use Excel also make art with it? Because sometimes devs also just download exe files on GitHub :D

          They don’t just always copy code from there.

          • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
            0·
            9 months ago

            Do MOST people who use GitHub download .exes? In my experience the VAST majority of people are using it for source and version control, not external releases. The overwhelming majority. FOSS and OSS is a small portion of the overall GitHub user base compared to, say, enterprise companies.

            • Anamana@feddit.de
              0·
              9 months ago

              So you never downloaded a program on GitHub?

              No one everever said you need to compromise its focus on developers. There is no compromise to be made. It’s just a stupid button. Stop arguing lol.

              • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
                0·
                9 months ago

                you never downloaded a program on GitHub

                Precompiled binaries?!? Not even once. It’s a security risk akin to picking up gum on the sidewalk for a fun tasty treat.

                • lunarul@lemmy.world
                  0·
                  9 months ago

                  So when you just needed software to run on your machinr, you built it yourself. But first read every single line of code to ensure that it’s safe. Did I get that right?

                  Because if you don’t trust the developer to provide safe binaries then you wouldn’t trust the same developer to provide safe code either.

              • suy@programming.dev
                0·
                9 months ago

                The github project page is for developers, and Github already gives you tons of ways to make a user website. Don’t ask your users to visit github.com/group/project, make them visit group.github.io/project, like any sane person.

                Same with Gitlab, BTW.

                And if you don’t like the full static site, use the wiki, or guide your users in the first paragraphs of the README so they find the user information if they must.

              • drathvedro@lemm.ee
                0·
                9 months ago

                No, you shouldn’t be really downloading exe’s from github. It is widely being used to spread malware and pretend that the software is open source when it is not. At least look for a link to the store page(including microsoft store), a distro-specific package or build instructions. Those usually have an AV scan or at least harder to fake.

                • Sir_Fridge@lemmy.world
                  0·
                  9 months ago

                  Yeah a dude I know got hacked by downloading some random github program, the hacker even started taunting him via discord lol.

                  But I downloaded plenty of shit from github, like prusaslicer, my 3d printer’s firmware and plugins for octoprint. Always stuff that is verified via another page though. Almost never stuff that comes up during a random search, and if I do, I look it up first to see if it’s safe.

              • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
                0·
                9 months ago

                We’re talking about how to design one of the biggest platforms on the internet. Of course there is a compromise. No one is advocating for removing the button, but arguing that the UI is somehow deficient for people wanting to download binaries is really missing the purpose of GitHub.

                • Anamana@feddit.de
                  0·
                  9 months ago

                  It’s an additional feature of GitHub that literally everyone uses. Therefore it has purpose. I think it’s ridiculous to argue against it.

                  Explain to me how developers or the UI would suffer from easier access to releases?

      • OOFshoot@beehaw.org
        0·
        9 months ago

        I’ve bounced off GitHub more than once trying to figure out how to download the .exe file that I assumed must be somewhere. Honestly I still don’t understand the interface and I’ve submitted bug reports for Jeroba on there. I might have even used GitHub for a project once? Every time I look at it it’s overwhelming and confusing and none of it is self-explanatory. But, that’s fairly true for a lot of stuff in programming.

        • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
          0·
          9 months ago

          If there is an exe, it’s under the releases link. On desktop it’s on the right sidebar below “About”. On mobile it’s at the bottom after the readme blurb.

          It’s not obvious because the code is the main focus and GitHub would much rather people host their releases somewhere else.

          • BatmanAoD@programming.dev
            0·
            9 months ago

            And even if releases are hosted on github, there should ideally be a download links page somewhere that presents the different binaries or installation files in an easier to understand format, especially if the software is designed for non-developers.

          • smeg@feddit.ukEnglish
            0·
            9 months ago

            That’s where it is? I’ve been sneaking my way in by clicking tags and then the releases toggle!

    • Artyom@lemm.ee
      0·
      9 months ago

      Honestly, releases and the readme could be the first page on their own, you can push the code to another tab as long as the clone button is there. There’s at most a 5% chance I’m just gonna raw dog the code straight from the browser anyways.

    • unalivejoy@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      On mobile, they hide the code by default. Though the releases are still hidden underneath the readme.

  • De_Narm@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 months ago

    It’s a command line tool. If you don’t know how to install it despite having the instructions, you don’t know how to use it too.

  • Roderik@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 months ago

    He eventually found the executable by Googling for it online and is now part of a botnet.

  • Samsy@lemmy.ml
    0·
    9 months ago

    Sometimes I can understand this struggle. For example let’s play a game. There is this app from e-foundation “Blisslauncher” it’s the default of eOS. And since I like it but don’t use eOS I want to download the apk from their gitlab page.

    https://gitlab.e.foundation/e/os/BlissLauncher

    So tell me, where is the latest release apk?

    • Ekky@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      like this?

      # Let Git take a rest with some yummy awk chocolate logs with delicious nuts and seeds, and don't be pushy!
git reset --hard $(git log --reverse | sed -n 1p | awk -F "[ ]" '{print $2}') && git push -f

      EDIT: Don’t actually run it.

      • subtext@lemmy.world
        0·
        9 months ago

        Can you explain what this does? I’m thinking something along the lines of reverting all commits except the very first one?

        • Ekky@sopuli.xyz
          0·
          9 months ago

          You are correct! It sets HEAD to the first commit and then force pushes, deleting everything after HEAD.

          Though, it only affects the currently selected branch.