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

Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

blog.gitea.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 187 posts

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#61

Post by bongobingo1 »

leppr wrote: post #34
remram wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They mention "a decentralized autonomous organization" which is a blockchain invention (a "smart contract" thingie): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organ...

The term DAO as it's used now is orthogonal to blockchain and crypto. It's mostly a term to describe codified governance/community systems. There may be point systems implemented via crypto tokens, but in the vast majority of cases those would be better implemented on centralized ledgers since there's someone with centralized control over either the token issuance, the communication channels, or other essential resou…

The term crypto as it's used now is orthogonal to crypto.

ducks

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#62

Post by sofixa »

pjmlp wrote: post #19
sofixa wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are an open source project that takes donations: don't get greedy. Two projects I went out of my way to support because they were open source shortly afterwards started "experimenting with models". How do you know it's greed and not just insufficient donations forcing them to try to find alternative financing? Just because you donated doesn't mean enough people/businesses did.

This is usually the main problem, in most cases the donations aren't enough as main line of income.

Yep. I recall the blog post by InfluxData on monetisation/sustainability and that there's very few options available for an open source software to become self-sustainable, and even fewer working ones. Influx went with the open core route, removing features from the open source version, which kind of killed it.

https://www.influxdata.com/blog/update-on-influxdb-clusterin...

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#63

Post by guywhocodes »

alias_neo wrote: post #59
bruce511 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to assume you are not an enterprise - forgive me if I'm wrong. Enterprises have very different needs to individual developers and small shops. So there are always features which apply to enterprises but not to small companies. Consider for example Active Directory integration. Equally purchasing in an enterprise is different to small companies. If you work for a small company you can basically go to a decis…

The issue, in my mind, if I was making a similar comment, is that projects seem draw the line in the wrong place for where "Enterprise" begins. I suspect this person's fears may be similar. The issue isn't that they'll offer enterprise, the issue is that they'll carve up the non-enterprise version as a differentiator. Inevitably, and I've seen this before, the non-enterprise version loses all steam because time and e…

This is pretty much my sentiment as well. The problem is that the obscure integration problems are better solved by a system integrator if they are so bespoke they don't belong in the code base.

I've worked with enterprise customers before and yes it tend to be LDAP and active directory stuff they ask for in terms of features. I run my own LDAP, am I enterprise?

Further this undermines their argument. It comes off as "hey we want some of that pie". The alternative is the foundation route. Or just to start your own system integration business, not to muddy the lines.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#64

Post by [deleted] »

hrbf wrote: post #56
Dave3of5 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you setup a plain git server is there a step by step anywhere I could follow ?

Funny you should ask. I had actually written this up back then – for a FreeBSD install because it’s what I use. https://herrbischoff.com/2021/10/how-to-install-cgit-with-gi... I’ve also tripped over something regarding “master” and “main” branches that’s easily fixed: https://herrbischoff.com/2022/05/cgit-missing-idle-column-on... If you want it even simpler, just run mkdir repo.git && cd repo.git git init —bare in a…

[deleted]

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#65

Post by vbezhenar »

remram wrote: post #5

I've been donating to Gitea for years (on their Open Collective [1]) but if they start with this cryptocurrency/blockchain stuff, I am out. I am trying to fund development, not invest unstable currency technology. Gitea itself started as a fork of Gogs, it wouldn't be too surprising to see it fork again if they start being creative with the brand. [1]: https://opencollective.com/gitea

Recently I researched a little bit about this Gogs and Gitea situation. Here's what I've got: Gogs is maintained by a single person. He was reluctant to accept external contributions, so Gitea was forked. Now Gitea is very active with lots of contributors and more features, but Gogs is still maintained and does have many necessary features.

We were migrating from GitLab, so I considered to install Gogs, we decided to go with GitHub unfortunately.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#66

Post by dachary »

guywhocodes wrote: post #11

Lost me at: > An enhanced enterprise version Good thing it's towards the end, guess it's time for the next fork of gogs then.

It means there will be a proprietary version of Gitea, named Gitea Enterprise or something similar. The company is based on an Open Core business model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#67

Post by dachary »

kyriakos wrote: post #8

Going the way of gitlab?

In terms of business model, yes. Now Gitea and GitLab are both https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model

There is however a difference and that matters significantly. GitLab was a company when they made the move to Open Core. It was their decision to make, unilateraly.

Gitea was a community driver project, with elected leaders assumed to care for the need of the community before their own. But they secretly created this company and transferred the domain and trademark to the company. So the community is gone an the volunteer contributors have been taken by surprise. This is not good.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#68

Post by olavgg »

I am a big fan of Gitea, it does exactly what I wants it too and its very easy to maintain over time.

I run it together with ZFS and SQLite. This enables atomic snapshot of both the database and git repository. And this is of course replicated to another system. SQLite is plenty fast, people should avoid more complex solutions using PostgreSQL or MySQL. I've also configured SSO with Azure Active Directory which everyone with mail from Microsoft has access for free.

For the past few years I've completed a few dozen upgrades, only 2 times it has broken. One was a new configuration property I needed to add, and one was that I upgraded GoLang a bit too early and Gitea didn't support it. Compared to many other open source projects, Gitea is a joy to use and run. And I hope it will stay like this for another 10 years.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#69

Post by [deleted] »

tpxl wrote: post #53
drej wrote: post #45

For me the main deterrent from Gitea has been their approach to UI design. The shameless inspiration (if you can call it that) they took from Github is pretty startling, the two interfaces look pretty much identical (well, Github has recently redesigned its repo page, but many can remember the old design). Sure, get inspired, make something similar here or there, but this is an outright copy of the whole product desi…

I just compared Gitea and Gitlab side-by-side and they're very, very similar. So either there's also copying between GitHub and Gitlab, or the design of git lends itself to a very specific interface.

[deleted]

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#70

Post by xorcist »

girvo wrote: post #20
phinnaeus wrote: post #12

If the author of this blogpost is reading this and wondering why the link in the post didn't render properly: > (their move to using Gitea)[ https://code.blender.org/2022/07/gitea-diaries-part-1/ ] it's because you switched up which braces go where for a markdown link. should be [text](link)

I constantly make that mistake. I don't know why, I simply can't seem to get the muscle memory right for some reason, and I always do ()[] first.

Brackets are a perfectly normal way to stylize references in every other context [1].

I don't know why Gruber made it backwards in Markdown but it was very clearly a mistake.

--

[1] Like this.

Post reply on HN