search

isaacs / github

Just a place to track issues and feature requests that I have for github
2.21k stars 129 forks source link

Settings: Add option for disabling the fork button on repositories. #1280

Open AraHaan opened 6 years ago

AraHaan commented 6 years ago

I would like the option to disable forking original repositories if the developer(s) do not want forks that then people could end up with out of date forks. Or maybe an option so when someone does fork the original repository, if it has branches that was deleted, or unchanged and the main one added commits to (like an unchanged master branch) that the fork would automatically update according to the repository that it is forked on. Also maybe disable fork of a fork of a fork as that becomes confusing as well sometimes.

Basically I think a fork that does not have a branch that has a opened pull request, or that does not contribute any changes whatsoever should be automatically managed by github itself as sometimes the forkee does not care to update it themself.

cirosantilli commented 6 years ago

autoupdate: https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/438

audioboy77 commented 6 years ago

its annoying when people fork your project and then make no fixes or changes. or make fixes which are then never offered back to the original developer

AraHaan commented 6 years ago

Ye ikr, that is why I want to option to:

  1. disable a fork unless a user actually commited changes, in which case after commited automatically creates a pull request to the original repository that it was forked from.
  2. Disable forking altogether and just use branches in the original repository and when perfected merged into master and possibly cherry-picked to release branches.
  3. The auto update forks as posted above with the issue link for it.
mshutt commented 6 years ago

+1,000,000. Please!

dcorvus commented 5 years ago

I wholeheartedly agree. It's annoying since users can fork your creations and claim it as their own, it would be great if we could disable forking at our convenience, or put rules/timers, say after X amount of time if there's not more than X changes the fork is destroyed.
Anyway, huge bump.

the9000 commented 5 years ago

To me, disabling the fork button is utterly counter-productive.

Anybody using git can clone your repo and push it under their own account anyway. This is as bad or worse than explicit forking:

mu578 commented 5 years ago

For people having company repos / organizations somehow having this option as part of permission settings would be great, enforcing internal policies is tiring... However, I do know, it would require to temper git itself to add this layer of authorized (or not) operation per user.

avin-shum commented 5 years ago

As long as other people can download your repo, disabling forking seems meaningless. If you do not want others to have your source code, you can make your repo private.

jayantsarda commented 5 years ago

Is there any way to avoid people creating PR against the main repo from their repo. We want to encourage people to create more branches in base repo and create PRs instead of creating PRs from personal repo. They can still clone it but should not be able to create PRs from their repo

kburson commented 5 years ago

I actually want the fork because I do not want to show who else has copied the repo and submitted changes to it. My repos are homework repos, so forking just allows an audit trail for students to follow -- look at other peoples historical answers and copy what they like. I want to disable this functionality.

I warn against forking and and submitting PR to the origin -- but that is a warning with no teeth. People can still fork and submit answers. This forces me to delete the origin and create a new origin.

wizacedric commented 5 years ago

@kburson You can archive your repository.

kmilord commented 4 years ago

@wizacedric This will make the repository, issues, pull requests, labels, milestones, projects, wiki, releases, commits, tags, branches, reactions and comments read-only and disable any future comments. The repository CAN still be forked.

Iam looking for a solution to this issue too, pls let me know if is fixed or how to fix it :D

LadyCailin commented 4 years ago

Software being open source and redistributable are two different things, and not necessary (though overwhelmingly usually) the same. Shareware is a good example, it's free to download and try out, but it's not free software. Same thing, if you have open source code, but don't allow distribution, (or perhaps have free licenses for other open source, but charge money for businesses) then it makes sense to prevent forking, because forks are distributions.

So I think there is a real use case here for a repo being public but unforkable.

DanielGoldfarb commented 4 years ago
xmehulx commented 4 years ago

In my case, I publish writeups of certain challenges and publish them on my github pages. Someone just took all my writeups and claimed them as their own lol!

DanielGoldfarb commented 4 years ago

Yeah, that's really annoying, but blocking forking won't prevent people from grabbing your work and claiming it is their own. Blocking forking and cloning will at least create a "speed bump", but if the theif is patient, and your work is publically viewable, no matter where it is published, they can copy/paste and still claim your work as their own ¯\(ツ)/¯

wyz23x2 commented 4 years ago

+1

greggman commented 4 years ago

This might be the most ridiculous thread ever 😂

Like you all don't actually get the point of git and public repos. If you don't want people to fork your project don't give people access to your code, don't give access to your git repo, and don't put them on github in public. Sheesh. It's like you setup a free lemonade stand and are then upset when people help themselves to lemonade.

Github = A place to host git repos Git = A way to let people fork/clone/access your code (all words for the same thing)

Right tool for the right job. Stop using Git and Github if you don't want people to be able to fork. Forking is git's entire purpose.

xmehulx commented 4 years ago

Haha @greggman you are so funny, I can't stop laughing. My point being, please copy the code, copy the template, I got no issues with that, GitHub IS synonymous to open-source, we all know that! But should they just steal the certification and awards we achieved and display as they have achieved that, articles that we have written display them as they have written them? I think you are missing the point here with your hilarious jokes :)

DanielGoldfarb commented 4 years ago

+1 @xmehulx ... I agree @greggman 's comments are wry and amusing; but many people are missing the point here. Although there is a lot of discussion here about open source, private repositories, and plagiarism, this issue is only asking for one thing: the ability to disable the fork button.

This is not a request to block copying code. One can always block copying by creating a private repository. Nor is it a request to prevent someone stealing your code, or written work, and claiming it is theirs -- sorry, but if it is in any way available to other people, you can never prevent others from stealing it or claiming it is theirs. This is where I agree with @greggman that there are some ridiculous things in this thread: you can't prevent others from stealing your work once you make it available to them (even if you make it privately available to a small number of people that you think you can trust). The only thing you can do is make it more difficult for them to steal it, and/or make sure there can be negative consequences to stealing it (for example, take them to court).

This issue is requesting only the ability disable the fork button on GitHub. By the way, @greggman, regarding:

Git = A way to let people fork/clone/access your code (all words for the same thing)

Not all the same thing. Clone is part of git, but not fork. As far as I know fork is specifically a GitHub thing (it's basically a clone, to another GitHub public repository, with a functional "link" back to the original repository (for PR purposes, etc)).

Although this issue starts out simply requesting the ability to disable the fork button, there is some discussion about possible reasons behind that: keeping forks in sync. Personally I think these are two, separate but partially related, issues. It would be nice to have a way to at least "opt in" to keeping forks somehow in sync with an upstream repository. But there are a lot of issues and complications with that: what if someone is working on an enhancment in a fork that would have a merge conflict with a change from upstream. Furthermore, and this is the case for me: I would like to disable forking for other reasons (see my comments above). If I make something open source, then by definition people should be able to copy and use it; but for various reasons I may want to prevent a plethora of forks on GitHub itself.

Can we keep the discussion here focused on the "Fork Button" and possible reasons for wanting to be able disable it (and possible alternative solutions)?

I enjoy getting involved in discussions of open source plagiarism, philosophy, and related topics, but I think this Issue is not the place for them.

greggman commented 4 years ago

By the way, @greggman, regarding:

Git = A way to let people fork/clone/access your code (all words for the same thing)

Not all the same thing. Clone is part of git, but not fork.

All the fork button really does is execute git clone path/to/your/repo on github's machines

What is git: From the git website

Git is a distributed version control system

It's point is to be distributed. That is achieved by cloning the code. cloning makes a new fork.

From the docs

NAME git-clone - Clone a repository into a new directory

DESCRIPTION Clones a repository into a newly created directory, creates remote-tracking branches for each branch in the cloned repository (visible using git branch --remotes), and creates and checks out an initial branch that is forked from the cloned repository’s currently active branch.

In any case whether or not github removes the fork button students will quickly pass around the info they can just type git clone https://gitub.com/teachername/repo.git and get their own fork and certainly anyone that intentionally wants to take your content will do the same.

The point I'm trying to make is you all seem to be asking for a feature that is the antithesis of what this site is about. It's like you're going to a orange juice factory and asking for apple juice, or maybe better, you're going the butcher asking for veggies. If you don't want it to be simple to copy your content then you probably shouldn't be putting your content on a service who's entire point of existence is making your content easy to copy. There are plenty of services you could use that are not designed to make things easy to copy.

emmahsax commented 3 years ago

I think it'd be fine to disable forking for a repository. This I could see as good for company repositories or school repositories. However, I think automatically managing forks is a bad idea. There are several repositories I use for my personal website, but there were little changes I wanted to make for my use only. So I made forks and made changes.... and now I update those forks and manage them as if they were my own. I do change the README to point to my repository's links, and I don't make pull requests back to the source links. However, I do leave around that "forked from source repository" at the top.

I would never want GitHub to manage that for me, or to make automatic PRs back to the source. There's a reason I don't.

vincerubinetti commented 3 years ago

Perhaps one other legitimate reason to disallow forks that hasn't been mentioned yet: templates.

I have a repo that is designed and meant to be a template, but people mistakenly create forks of it and sometimes have trouble because of it.

MSFTserver commented 3 years ago

Storing large files in LFS is actually hell with forks, on popular repos im getting hit bandwidth caps left and right, aparently if a user forks my repo and makes changes to his fork it effects my LFS bandwidth and this would be a huge saver since you dont allow much LFS management

j00ch commented 3 years ago

https://ericgreer.info/post/judging-the-stupidity-of-github-projects/

At least add a confirmation dialog for the fork button, i often find myself clicking the fork button when i actually just want to see the forks. Noobs usually don't know how or even care to remove accidental forks.

Anunayj commented 3 years ago

Software being open source and redistributable are two different things, and not necessary (though overwhelmingly usually) the same. Shareware is a good example, it's free to download and try out, but it's not free software. Same thing, if you have open source code, but don't allow distribution, (or perhaps have free licenses for other open source, but charge money for businesses) then it makes sense to prevent forking, because forks are distributions.

So I think there is a real use case here for a repo being public but unforkable.

Yup, as for people who git pull and git push, a DMCA notice can be issued, it's my copyright afterall. My license may allow people to download the code and view/compile it for their own PERSONAL usage/create patches, and may not allow redistribution of the original code. I do own copyright to it. This would be similar to something like Movies, where the end users cannot redistribute it (and can be legally held responsible for it), but can download it for his personal viewing.

Alternatively for this case "Fork to private repo" might make sense too.

AraHaan commented 3 years ago

Software being open source and redistributable are two different things, and not necessary (though overwhelmingly usually) the same. Shareware is a good example, it's free to download and try out, but it's not free software. Same thing, if you have open source code, but don't allow distribution, (or perhaps have free licenses for other open source, but charge money for businesses) then it makes sense to prevent forking, because forks are distributions. So I think there is a real use case here for a repo being public but unforkable.

Yup, as for people who git pull and git push, a DMCA notice can be issued, it's my copyright afterall. My license may allow people to download the code and view/compile it for their own PERSONAL usage/create patches, and may not allow redistribution of the original code. I do own copyright to it. This would be similar to something like Movies, where the end users cannot redistribute it (and can be legally held responsible for it), but can download it for his personal viewing. Alternatively for this case "Fork to private repo" might make sense too.

So if the license forbids forking, IMO GitHub should also check whether somebody clones and pushes a given repo. Maybe it would be difficult to do that at file level, though I think that for a non-modified code, it should be possible to calculate some checksum but at least it should check it at the commit level, comparing commit hashes.

except when they squash all the commits on them to a single commit and then use git to take ownership of that commit.

TrainerRoshi commented 3 years ago

+1 I have 6 forks of my code with malicious code inserted inside.

transcental commented 3 years ago

I would love an option that disables forking AND git cloning. See https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-449766025 Or maybe a new license that doesn't allow forking/cloning of any type.

DanielGoldfarb commented 3 years ago

I would love an option that disables forking AND git cloning. See #1280 (comment) Or maybe a new license that doesn't allow forking/cloning of any type.

That's basically the definition of a private repository. Are you saying you want people to be able to see (and copy/paste) your code, but not clone it?

transcental commented 3 years ago

Yes. Sure, everyone can copy and paste it, but if it is really large that will take ages and would everyone really go through all that effort?

From: Daniel Goldfarb @.> Sent: 25 May 2021 20:29 To: isaacs/github @.> Cc: Barnes,Dillon @.>; Comment @.> Subject: Re: [isaacs/github] Settings: Add option for disabling the fork button on repositories. (#1280)

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the School. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact IT Support if you are unsure.

I would love an option that disables forking AND git cloning. See #1280 (comment)https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-449766025 Or maybe a new license that doesn't allow forking/cloning of any type.

That's basically the definition of a private repository. Are you saying you want people to be able to see (and copy/paste) your code, but not clone it?

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-848202464, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUAPGD34C2NJY57VPDDTRZDTPP277ANCNFSM4FFDJ4QA.

Note: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Beaumont Leys School reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. Thank You.

DanielGoldfarb commented 3 years ago

@dbarnes18

I think its strange to share your code but put a speed bump in place for copying it. (However, one way to implement a work-around for yourself would be to keep the code in a private repository, and have a github action that grabs the code and converts it to an image (or set of images) that you can publish in a public repository. Then people can see you code but not copy/paste it.)

There are reasons for blocking forking (but not cloning) because a fork on github is inherently tied and connected to the repository. For example, in repositories that are otherwise public but for various reasons do not want pull requests, that connection is a hinderance (or at least an nuisance). At other times, such a connection is exactly the reason to support forking (as noted here)

That said, since we can't seem to get GitHub to agree to allow the ability to block forking, i wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to allow the ability to block cloning (while still leaving the repository as public).

Although it seems strange to me to block cloning ultimately I am a big fan of giving users choices as long as it does not severely complicate the maintenance of the code. I see no reason not to allow both of these as optional choices for the user. The repository settings page could have two additional flags: one to block forking and one to block cloning. By default these should allow cloning and forking. Based on my many years of professional coding experience, these both would be relatively trivial to implement.

I don't understand why some of the discussion above is so strongly opposed to allowing the option to block forking. What's the big deal of allowing it as a non-default option??

transcental commented 3 years ago

A reason to block cloning is because people can then upload it to their own repository or to another platform like GitLab or BitBucket

But how would you do that with GH Actions? I don’t really use GH Actions often so I have no idea how to do stuff like that.

From: Daniel Goldfarb @.> Date: Wednesday, 26 May 2021 at 16:24 To: isaacs/github @.> Cc: Barnes,Dillon @.>, Mention @.> Subject: Re: [isaacs/github] Settings: Add option for disabling the fork button on repositories. (#1280)

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the School. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact IT Support if you are unsure.

@dbarnes18https://github.com/dbarnes18

I think its strange to share your code but put a speed bump in place for copying it. (However, one way to implement a work-around for yourself would be to keep the code in a private repository, and have a github action that grabs the code and converts it to an image (or set of images) that you can publish in a public repository. Then people can see you code but not copy/paste it.)

There are reasons for blocking forking (but not cloning) because a fork on github is inherently tied and connected to the repository. For example, in repositories that are otherwise public but for various reasons do not want pull requests, that connection is a hinderance (or at least an nuisance). At other times, such a connection is exactly the reason to support forking (as noted herehttps://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-449766025)

That said, since we can't seem to get GitHub to agree to allow the ability to block forking, i wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to allow the ability to block cloning (while still leaving the repository as public).

Although it seems strange to me to block cloning ultimately I am a big fan of giving users choices as long as it does not severely complicate the maintenance of the code. I see no reason not to allow both of these as optional choices for the user. The repository settings page could have two additional flags: one to block forking and one to block cloning. By default these should allow cloning and forking. Based on my many years of professional coding experience, these both would be relatively trivial to implement.

I don't understand why some of the discussion above is so strongly opposed to allowing the option to block forking. What's the big deal of allowing it as a non-default option??

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-848864567, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUAPGD76OLLGQDZJGOXCMHTTPUHEFANCNFSM4FFDJ4QA.

Note: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Beaumont Leys School reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. Thank You.

transcental commented 3 years ago

A reason to block cloning is because people can then upload it to their own repository or to another platform like [GitLab](https://about.gitlab.com/) or [BitBucket](https://bitbucket.org) https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-848888257 Ah. Apparently email replies do not support Markdown. Good to know.

DanielGoldfarb commented 3 years ago

@dbarnes18 I am also not very familiar with GitHub actions, but based on everything I have read or heard about GitHub actions, I imagine something like this: You would first write a script to convert the text of your code to an image and then use a github action to run that script against a code file (or files) in your private repository every time the code gets updated. The part I am not certain about is whether it is possible to also have a github action then push the image to a public repository. I faintly recall reading something that implied that is possible, but if not, then that becomes a manual step. hth.

alialiwa2005 commented 3 years ago

I support this.

Sometimes, you've got to be private, but not always completely private (like a Hacker Plan private repository).

What I mean is, sometimes you want others to use your program, so you want your product to be accessible by the public, but in a closed-source way (so the actual code behind it is hidden and un-fork-able).

Please add an option, preferably one available for standard and Hacker plan users alike, to at least disable forking, and more ideally, hide the code behind the Repl, while allowing the public to access/run the repl.

transcental commented 3 years ago

Are you sure you put this in the right place? This is GitHub not Replit

From: Ali A. Saleh @.> Date: Wednesday, 26 May 2021 at 18:59 To: isaacs/github @.> Cc: Barnes,Dillon @.>, Mention @.> Subject: Re: [isaacs/github] Settings: Add option for disabling the fork button on repositories. (#1280)

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the School. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact IT Support if you are unsure.

I support this.

Sometimes, you've got to be private, but not always completely private (like a Hacker Plan private repository).

What I mean is, sometimes you want others to use your program, so you want your product to be accessible by the public, but in a closed-source way (so the actual code behind it is hidden and un-fork-able).

Please add an option, preferably one available for standard and Hacker plan users alike, to at least disable forking, and more ideally, hide the code behind the Repl, while allowing the public to access/run the repl.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-848997907, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUAPGD2N3FZHZ5FRM2CX2XTTPUZIBANCNFSM4FFDJ4QA.

Note: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Beaumont Leys School reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. Thank You.

oprogramador commented 3 years ago

How can I stop getting notifications on this issue?

I've removed my comments and reactions.

transcental commented 3 years ago

There is an unsubscribe button near the top of the page. @.***D75261.F3769820]

From: Piotr @.> Date: Wednesday, 26 May 2021 at 19:03 To: isaacs/github @.> Cc: Barnes,Dillon @.>, Mention @.> Subject: Re: [isaacs/github] Settings: Add option for disabling the fork button on repositories. (#1280)

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the School. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact IT Support if you are unsure.

How can I stop getting notifications on this issue?

I removed my comments and reactions.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-849000578, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUAPGDZ4XD3ZXIHI2E46C7DTPUZW5ANCNFSM4FFDJ4QA.

Note: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Beaumont Leys School reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. Thank You.

Levi-Lesches commented 3 years ago

Okay, since everyone is talking over each other, so let's go over all the points:

  1. Blocking forks can be convenient for the following reasons: a. intellectual property concerns: this is my code and I don't want others to claim it under their name b. security concerns: people are inserting bad changes to my code that are now public c. management concerns: people will be confused which repo is "official", out-of-date forks, making PRs, issues d. end-user concerns: this project wasn't designed to be forked e. other reasons
  2. Forking vs the GitHub fork button:
    • Copying is always possible with Git, even if GitHub disallows forking
    • However, getting rid of the fork button may have the following benefits: a. it makes it inconvenient, and thus discourages some from forking (example: 1d) b. adverse effects from forking make this an even better reason
    • But removing the button has harmful effects too, some even contradict reasons for its removal! a. It implies that copying is impossible. It is, in fact, very possible to do so without forking b. GitHub can't find the original material to show on the fork's page. This conflicts with 1a, 1b, and 1c c. GitHub can't find the fork on the original repo. This conflicts with 1a, 1b, and 1c d. Any functionality GitHub releases for forks won't apply to non-fork copies. Conflicts with 1c, 1d, and 1e
  3. Possible ways to discourage/block forking
    • Maybe your repo is not intended for open-source? Distribute the built files (.exe, .apk, .html) or host it privately
    • GitHub should keep forks up-to-date (#438, #1122), to avoid 1c
    • allow forks to be private, to avoid 1a, 1b, and 1c
    • show warning/confirmation message, possibly provided by repo owner, to avoid 1d

My personal opinions:

DanielGoldfarb commented 3 years ago

@dbarnes18

How can I stop getting notifications on this issue?

Near the top of this page, slightly down (approximately 3 comments down) on the right side you should see an Unsubscribe button.

alialiwa2005 commented 3 years ago

Are you sure you put this in the right place? This is GitHub not Replit From: Ali A. Saleh @.> Date: Wednesday, 26 May 2021 at 18:59 To: isaacs/github @.> Cc: Barnes,Dillon @.>, Mention @.> Subject: Re: [isaacs/github] Settings: Add option for disabling the fork button on repositories. (#1280) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the School. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please contact IT Support if you are unsure. I support this. Sometimes, you've got to be private, but not always completely private (like a Hacker Plan private repository). What I mean is, sometimes you want others to use your program, so you want your product to be accessible by the public, but in a closed-source way (so the actual code behind it is hidden and un-fork-able). Please add an option, preferably one available for standard and Hacker plan users alike, to at least disable forking, and more ideally, hide the code behind the Repl, while allowing the public to access/run the repl. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#1280 (comment)>, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUAPGD2N3FZHZ5FRM2CX2XTTPUZIBANCNFSM4FFDJ4QA. Note: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. Beaumont Leys School reserves the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. Thank You.

My bad, you're right, wrong place.

transcental commented 3 years ago

@dbarnes18

How can I stop getting notifications on this issue?

Near the top of this page, slightly down (approximately 3 comments down) on the right side you should see an Unsubscribe button.

That is what I was saying in https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1280#issuecomment-849001634 Though the email replies do not look very nice in GitHub.

@DanielGoldfarb

dag7dev commented 3 years ago

Up.

Levi-Lesches commented 3 years ago

Polite reminder that as per #1985, this repo is deprecated -- GitHub staff do not (and have never claimed to) monitor these pages. All feedback should now go to the official GitHub feedback discussions page.