19

I have some projects that are in a very early development state. They are nowhere nearing completion but I do host them (as public repos) on GitHub because:

  • I have multiple computers and I want access to my code everywhere
  • I want a backup for my code
  • I want it to be easy if someone wants to collaborate in some way
  • I use GitHub Issues as a poor man's project management software

Is it OK to publish a project on GitHub even when it is very early in the development? I am a bit concerned about someone to come by and say OMG this is total BS, this code is so bad! while looking at unpolished/still in development/not tested code.

What are your practices when you start new public projects? Do you wait until you have something substantial to show or you create a bare repo directly on GitHub and start from there?

I used GitHub throughout this post but this applies to every code hosting service out there.

Improve this question
6
  • Does GitHub give you the option to restric access?
    – FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
    Oct 23, 2012 at 19:05
  • @FrustratedWithFormsDesigner Only for paid accounts. Though nobody can push directly to your repo. For this they have to create a pull request and I have to approve it and merge it myself.
    – marco-fiset
    Oct 23, 2012 at 19:08
  • Ah. Paid accounts are pretty pricey?
    – FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
    Oct 23, 2012 at 19:09
  • 7
    Could use Bitbucket (Free) and keep it private repo then make it public once you feel it is ok to be seen.
    – Rig
    Oct 23, 2012 at 19:12
  • @FrustratedWithFormsDesigner Not that much. From 7$/month. But I'm pretty sure you knew that already, didn't you? :P You only wanted me to realise that I could just pay for it and shut up. Just kidding by the way :P
    – marco-fiset
    Oct 23, 2012 at 19:12

7 Answers 7

Reset to default
38

Of course it is OK: it is hard to imagine that over 4,098,118 projects currently hosted on GitHub would all be 100% great and useful! You are not forcing anyone to use your code or even to look at it. If you host the project primarily for yourself, the quality of your code is of concern to you, and nobody else.

You listed all the right reasons to host your project - backups, universal access, and possibility of collaboration with others are great reasons to start hosting as early as possible.

Improve this answer
12

Push whatever you want as early as possible. No one's going to look at it unless you publicise it and it's interesting.

If you're really worried, some free code hosting services offer private repositories.

Improve this answer
1
  • 2
    One such service with free private repositories is Bit Bucket.
    – davidhaskins
    Oct 23, 2012 at 20:19
4

You could use Bitbucket which has most of the project management features, all of the cloud-based DCVS features and it has free private repositories so you can keep it on the DL.

Improve this answer
2

Sure you can publish it in an early development - But mark it as pre-alpha, later set alpha, beta...

Improve this answer
1
  • 2
    There's really no point to keeping track of that until you're actually planning to do a release (and even then, only if you're big enough that anyone would care).
    – Brendan Long
    Oct 24, 2012 at 2:33
1

No one is just going to stumble on your project. And if they did they aren't going to go blabbing all over the internet about it.

Improve this answer
1

I would say that it depends upon whether you think the code is incomplete or just plain bad. If bad, you may want to consider whether you are now or might soon be looking for a new position; and whether or not the code is discoverable if a potential employer is researching you.

OTOH, even bad code might be considered a bonus, particulaly if it is commented as such.

My advice: decide with care.

Improve this answer
0

Sure you can push whatever you want, but still it is better when you push a more pre beta solution to GitHub.

You can easily use DropBox for storing you GitHub projects and the good part is that you'll have access to them on any computer.

Improve this answer
2
  • 4
    I strongly recommend against this. From personal experience of doing so I found that I was getting a big mess of altered and reverted files due to both systems trying to get them in synch. My approach is Dropbox for most stuff, 50GB plan and github for all code / version contolled files and ne'er the twain meetin' up.
    – Michael Durrant
    Oct 23, 2012 at 23:57
  • I agree. Dropbox + git (especially the .git directory) do not mix.
    – asmeurer
    Oct 25, 2012 at 6:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.