Debian and GNOME announce plans to migrate communities to GitLab

Post by dominotw » Wed, Nov 15, 2017, 2:31 PM UTC

YorickPeterse wrote: post #40

dominotw wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought this up on HN in the past[1], but it gets instantly downvoted( by gitlab employees?) , my comment was a response to CEO claiming how their marketing is honest[2]. They also declared Gitlab CI as number one CI by excluding Jenkins because of their made up defintion of "modern" . 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15590240 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15589654

You are most likely getting downvoted because of statements such as: > These guys are not honest people, just copycats under the guise of "open".

Post by dominotw » Wed, Nov 15, 2017, 2:33 PM UTC

seqastian wrote: post #48

sandworm101 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> if their marketing department is aggressive? Telling lies /= aggressive. Where advertising makes claims that are objectively false they should be called out. This isn't 'puffing' or hyperbolic opinion. This is saying X is Y. That these lies are in support of an agenda with which many here might agree does not matter.

pretending everything is black and white and painting everyone who makes a non complete statement as liar, is what lead to the current political misery.

Post by dominotw » Wed, Nov 15, 2017, 2:37 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #45

camgunz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much do you really care if their marketing department is aggressive? Isn't it better that GitLab is open source and a reasonably good member of the OSS community? Honestly I don't even count those stats as false; Jenkins feels super old and the context weirdness ("Not every enterprise self-hosts a git repository") actually makes sense. If this is the trade to support OSS, it's way better than building a shadow su…

>>> if their marketing department is aggressive? Telling lies /= aggressive. Where advertising makes claims that are objectively false they should be called out. This isn't 'puffing' or hyperbolic opinion. This is saying X is Y. That these lies are in support of an agenda with which many here might agree does not matter.

Post by icebraining » Wed, Nov 15, 2017, 2:50 PM UTC

regularfry wrote: post #31

pizza234 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not so easy. Which lunch are you talking about? Self-hosted or hosted? I don't think GL will ever have anything much in the hosted sector, for two main reasons: 1. GH's infrastructure is far ahead of GL, and 2. the social factor also affects companies that have private repositories, but also public ones - it wouldn't make sense to only move the private repositories to save money When we think about the self-host…

The way I see it going is that many, many large companies will have a bunch of teams on GitHub (with good reason), with both public and private repos. They will also have a bunch of teams on GitLab instances that have been wildcatted into existence, possibly before GitHub had decent inroads, but more probably so the code doesn't leave the firewall. At some point, a Boss who may or may not have Pointy Hair will look a…

Post by sytse » Wed, Nov 15, 2017, 2:54 PM UTC

jwildeboer wrote: post #27

They claim that Fedora requires a CLA. Which is simply not true. Fedora was one of the first projects to completely remove the need for a CLA. Seven(!) years ago. See https://opensource.com/law/10/6/new-contributor-agreement-fe...