Been using UNIX since the late 80s; Linux since the mid-90s; virtualization since the early 2000s and spent the past few years working in the cloud space.
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Education
B.S. Psychology from Pennsylvania State University
Ironically, I've pretty much defaulted to "open publish": 1) I figure "who's going to steal my crap code"; and, 2) leaving it on public repositories means that I can find it again later if I ever move on/lose my credentials/etc.
The funny thing is that the pressure to not be open that I've run into is based on people not wanting to end up being the latest "thus and such company leaked confidential information" boat. A lot of developers — particularly those that come from closed backgrounds — have really sloppy practices with their code. I mean, even aside from the litany of "public S3 bucket" stories, most of us have read the various cautionary tales around: credentials pushed to GitHub; API tokens left in anonymously-browseable, public facing Jenkins servers; etc. At this point, some of those who are unsure of their own habits are terrified of open publishing.
I imagine it's that (near) terror that plays into why people choose to run their own Git servers when their workloads really wouldn't otherwise justify the efforts to do so. ...And why one of the companies my company has partnered with on a project has been "hinting" at the need to move all the code I developed for the project to their private GitLab instance: in looking at their initial PRs to forks of my code, they committed some practice-errors that could have proven embarrassing. Fortunately, they'd duped my public repo to their private git server and it was in looking at their private PR that I was able to see the various "no: for your sake, that's so not going to be merged back into my public repo."
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Ironically, I've pretty much defaulted to "open publish": 1) I figure "who's going to steal my crap code"; and, 2) leaving it on public repositories means that I can find it again later if I ever move on/lose my credentials/etc.
The funny thing is that the pressure to not be open that I've run into is based on people not wanting to end up being the latest "thus and such company leaked confidential information" boat. A lot of developers — particularly those that come from closed backgrounds — have really sloppy practices with their code. I mean, even aside from the litany of "public S3 bucket" stories, most of us have read the various cautionary tales around: credentials pushed to GitHub; API tokens left in anonymously-browseable, public facing Jenkins servers; etc. At this point, some of those who are unsure of their own habits are terrified of open publishing.
I imagine it's that (near) terror that plays into why people choose to run their own Git servers when their workloads really wouldn't otherwise justify the efforts to do so. ...And why one of the companies my company has partnered with on a project has been "hinting" at the need to move all the code I developed for the project to their private GitLab instance: in looking at their initial PRs to forks of my code, they committed some practice-errors that could have proven embarrassing. Fortunately, they'd duped my public repo to their private git server and it was in looking at their private PR that I was able to see the various "no: for your sake, that's so not going to be merged back into my public repo."