Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

mediawiki.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 408 posts

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#41

Post by SparkyMcUnicorn »

gravypod wrote: post #7

One thing stopping me from moving my company's code to gitlabs cloud offering is the storage sizes for repos being extremely small. I heard from a rep that this will change in November. I'm wondering if this purchase-more-storage change come relates to this?

The limit is 10GB, while GitHub's limit is "ideally less than 1 GB, and less than 5 GB is strongly recommended".

I don't consider 10GB to be "extremely small", especially since that's a larger than usual limit for a hosted solution.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#42

Post by paulus_magnus2 »

^F gittorrent.

It is like working in a big corporation. Eventually you will do / say something that won't be liked by a person in power / competitor and you will be cancelled. Community / public supported projects, also free speech are only safe from influence on community infrastructure. It's time to start decentralizing.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#43

Post by YorickPeterse »

gravypod wrote: post #7

One thing stopping me from moving my company's code to gitlabs cloud offering is the storage sizes for repos being extremely small. I heard from a rep that this will change in November. I'm wondering if this purchase-more-storage change come relates to this?

The repository storage size is 10GB [1]. I wouldn't consider that "extremely small".

[1]: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/gitlab_com/index.html#accoun...

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#44

Post by zimpenfish »

svrb wrote: post #39
badrequest wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're okay with the tool being difficult to use because you already know how to use it.

Software should be written for users, not non-users. You'd think this would be self-evident and yet here we are.

How do you then convert a non-user into a user with the least friction?

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#45

Post by boleary-gl »

Grimm1 wrote: post #21
q3k wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are still very limited when it comes to functionality though - only the first column in https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/self-managed/feature-compar... , right?

My understanding is you can self host and pay a sub and get access to all the other features. I may be wrong.

That's correct - with the GitLab Enterprise Edition you can self-host GitLab and get access to all of the features - both those from the Core open source version as well as our proprietary features.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#46

Post by boleary-gl »

q3k wrote: post #26
alex_reg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of those are self-hosted. "Core" is the free community edition. The others are not open source/free and require payment. Core is plenty for most use cases. That table makes it look like it has almost no features, but most items in the list are either advanced or pretty niche.

Right, so is Wikimedia going to pay $$$ to GitLab for one of the more advanced licenses?

No, Wikimedia is going to be using the Community Edition (CE) of GitLab, which is free and open source under an MIT license. This decision and the reasons for it are described in more detail in the FAQ section of the linked article.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#47

Post by zeitg3ist »

vorpalhex wrote: post #11
A_No_Name_Mouse wrote: post #3

A compony moves their code repository to a different provider. Honest question: why is this news worthy? Am I missing something?

Wikimedia is very cautious in making changes because they take very seriously the values of sustainability and predictability. That they are moving from Gerrit to Gitlab is a blow against Gerrit and a boon for Gitlab (assuming it goes well).

I don’t know about Wikimedia being super cautious when adopting technologies... I host a MediaWiki instance and there’s been a lot of “not so cautious” tech decisions in the past. Jumping early on the HHVM train (which they eventually had to leave); adopting Lua for wiki modules; developing Parsoid as a Node service (now rewritten in PHP)... None of these was the “safe option”; in some cases it worked out well but in others it didn’t.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#48

Post by JeremyNT »

paulus_magnus2 wrote: post #42

^F gittorrent. It is like working in a big corporation. Eventually you will do / say something that won't be liked by a person in power / competitor and you will be cancelled. Community / public supported projects, also free speech are only safe from influence on community infrastructure. It's time to start decentralizing.

Canceled by whom? They are self-hosting their own instance of Gitlab CE. If Gitlab the company disappears tomorrow, they can fork the project and continue using it.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#49

Post by nwah1 »

languagehacker wrote: post #40

In the past, I've found Gerrit to be reasonably good. Phabricator, on the other hand, not so much. Having worked with MediaWiki in the past on CRs, I think this will be a good move to modernize things for them. When faced with a similar task around the same time at Wikia (now Fandom), we chose GitHub while we were moving off of SVN. I'm glad we did at the time, even without all the additional features GitHub has. I u…

What features do you think Gitlab lacks compared to GitHub?

I haven't used the CI/CD features of either, but PR/MR features seem comparable. Is it the advanced workflow stuff and CI/CD integration where GitHub is better? Bots?

I think git in general should copy the approach of Fossil and include issue management and wikis along with the repo, to keep things consistent and avoid vendor lock-in.

But I would be a lot more worried about being locked-in to GitHub than Gitlab.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#50

Post by addicted »

detaro wrote: post #32
simlevesque wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how GitLab is a better option. China could pressure them too.

They're selfhosting.

Is this GitLab open source, or is it GitLab enterprise on the free plan?

Because they are different products, even if the GitLab marketing pages make it appear as if they are the same.

Post reply on HN