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

Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

code.blender.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#21

Post by yamtaddle »

bawolff wrote: post #16
tylersmith wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gitea does not use Github because the software can't handle their load requirements, but because they started using GH before Gitea had all the features they needed. They are actively working on hosting Gitea on Gitea, with the last piece being an importer to move over all their GH data. Blender seems to have been ok manually migrating some things and abandoning other things, since they weren't likely to ever get a P…

How much traffic could they possibly have? Quite frankly either gitea has absolutely terrible scalability or something else is off here. Edit: i misread the parent comment. My bad.

Huh? It isn't because of inability to handle load, that they host on GH.

Gitea performs alright. It can serve surprisingly-heavy traffic from a potato-tier VM with a SQLite backend (assuming the host network can keep up with it, anyway). Not Github-scale (but Github has... a lot of traffic, including a whole lot of write traffic) but quite a bit, and that's with basically the worst-possible hosting situation for handling high load.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#23

Post by techknowlogick »

cowmix wrote: post #2

I wonder how Gitea will hold up to all the traffic? Even Gitea hosts their stuff on Github.

Hi, I'm one of the members of the technical oversight committee of the Gitea project, and am employed to work on Gitea. The reason why the project itself is still on GitHub is due to the massive amount of metadata (20K+ issues and PRs, and all the comments, reactions, and other metadata attached to them) around the project, and the ratelimiting that is slowing the export. All the non-primary repos have long since moved to gitea.com.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#24

Post by techknowlogick »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #19
bawolff wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mirroring the code to github (or somewhere else) would solve that problem just as well. Not dogfooding your own product seems like a huge red flag to me.

There's clearly the intention to self-host, they seem to be waiting for support to ingest data from a GitHub data export which seems pretty reasonable.

Yes, this is exactly the case. Lots of data, and low ratelimits don't mix. All except for the main repo have already migrated to gitea.com

Disclaimer: I'm one of the members of the technical oversight committee of the Gitea project, and am employed to work on Gitea.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#26

Post by techknowlogick »

yamtaddle wrote: post #13
cowmix wrote: post #2

I wonder how Gitea will hold up to all the traffic? Even Gitea hosts their stuff on Github.

Doubt it'll be a problem. Github's scaling challenges have more to do with the write volume than the read volume. Even a project as big and active as Blender shouldn't make Gitea sweat too much on relatively modest hardware. Anonymous clones and such will surely be https, so, quite cache-friendly. I wanna say Gitea has some config options for hosting static files (like releases) on s3-compatible storage then serving…

Yup, that's right. Non-repo data (releases, avatars, packages, etc..) can all be hosted in s3-compat storage.

If you are interested in some benchmarks that Blender did you can find them here: https://code.blender.org/2023/02/gitea-test-drive/

Disclaimer: I'm one of the members of the technical oversight committee of the Gitea project, and am employed to work on Gitea.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#27

Post by FrenchyJiby »

sublinear wrote: post #22

Not to dunk on Phabricator, but did anyone actually enjoy using it? I always thought it was a mess anyway. Jenkins was also... "jankins". Of course this is all hindsight, but wow it doesn't even seem that long ago.

Considering the alternative at work was an old Bugzilla instance, and code review feedback was done by email, adopting Phabricator was a breath of fresh air: good engineering-oriented tickets (subtasks, task grouping), good code review experience + integration with tickets, a wiki, and a few extra... yeah it really rocked.

Of course, if you compare to Jira's ticket-management experience, and nowaday's github code review, sure, it's quite jank. But for a brief moment, in a period of time at work, Phabricator really shined!

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#28

Post by techknowlogick »

yamtaddle wrote: post #21
bawolff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much traffic could they possibly have? Quite frankly either gitea has absolutely terrible scalability or something else is off here. Edit: i misread the parent comment. My bad.

Huh? It isn't because of inability to handle load, that they host on GH. Gitea performs alright. It can serve surprisingly-heavy traffic from a potato-tier VM with a SQLite backend (assuming the host network can keep up with it, anyway). Not Github-scale (but Github has... a lot of traffic, including a whole lot of write traffic) but quite a bit, and that's with basically the worst-possible hosting situation for hand…

That's correct. It is not due to load, gitea.com already has most of the projects repos migrated already, just not the main one due to ratelimits and exporting all the issues. Gitea.com has thousands of users, and multi-TB traffic monthly on a fairly modest setup.

Disclaimer: I'm one of the members of the technical oversight committee of the Gitea project, and am employed to work on Gitea.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#29

Post by vfclists »

techknowlogick wrote: post #23
cowmix wrote: post #2

I wonder how Gitea will hold up to all the traffic? Even Gitea hosts their stuff on Github.

Hi, I'm one of the members of the technical oversight committee of the Gitea project, and am employed to work on Gitea. The reason why the project itself is still on GitHub is due to the massive amount of metadata (20K+ issues and PRs, and all the comments, reactions, and other metadata attached to them) around the project, and the ratelimiting that is slowing the export. All the non-primary repos have long since mov…

I start getting worried about projects when people say stuff like "I'm one of the members of the technical oversight committee of the Gitea project"

How many committees are there and how many people on each committee?

Post reply on HN