I'm surprised the author rejected using GitLab because of its Open Core model, but decided foe using Drone CI, which appears to be following a similar model.
If the reasoning is "gitlab is bloated" then it's more reasonable to me.
Evaluating new software forges
51–60 of 138 posts
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#52Is Microsoft secretly learning from the secrets in private GitHub repositories?
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#53I'm surprised the author rejected using GitLab because of its Open Core model, but decided foe using Drone CI, which appears to be following a similar model.
What I understood is that the author is not happy about the “Open Core” model and would prefer truly OSS, but the real deal breaker is maintaining Gitlab.
My experience self hosting Gitlab was pretty terrible, it requires a lot of attention on your part, and internally the project feels like a bunch of fragile scripts.
There’s also little documentation for when things go wrong, with was almost every single update.
In the end I switched to Gitea as well and I’ve been happy with it for years at this point.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#54I was hoping for an evaluation of Radicle--the only forge that seemed to be doing something exciting and "new", and one I haven't had the time to really analyze yet--but... no such luck :(.
There is also https://protocol.land and https://gitopia.com .
The latter is Web3/crypto la la land, and the former.. dunno, got to read the code, but I would like to know about the project, its goals, and who is behind it.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#55I was hoping for an evaluation of Radicle--the only forge that seemed to be doing something exciting and "new", and one I haven't had the time to really analyze yet--but... no such luck :(.
Wow! So glad someone mentioned this - I’ve been looking for something like it, going to have to set aside time to try it out.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#56I was hoping for an evaluation of Radicle--the only forge that seemed to be doing something exciting and "new", and one I haven't had the time to really analyze yet--but... no such luck :(.
https://pierre.co/ is another interesting one, focused on a product-development workflow.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#57He doesn’t want to use GitHub because it trains Copilot on f/oss code, but then selfhosts and mirrors all his code to GitHub anyway?
Why release free software if you don’t want others to use it?
Why provide any code to GitHub if you don’t want GitHub to use it?
This is just tribalism, the ideology isn’t even consistent.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
But is it a _complicated_ YAML file?
You don't have to make Gitlab/GitHub YAML files complicated if you don't want to. The "script" section can be just a call to a normal shell/Python/Typescript CI script. It's pretty widely known that you should keep as much stuff out of the YAML as possible, so you can run CI locally. That was definitely the most bullshit criticism in the article. Clearly not even something they actually care about because they settle…
> You don't have to make Gitlab/GitHub YAML files complicated if you don't want to. The "script" section can be just a call to a normal shell/Python/Typescript CI script.
It took me an embarrassingly long time to learn that you don't need to use their little action plugins for everything.
Once I figured that out, and figured out how to run CI in a container specified by the repo, I was actually quite happy to transition my CI away from Jenkins (which was always pretty rough, but I knew I could keep the builds running locally that way).
I guess the real proof will be if I'm able to ever leave GitHub, but I feel pretty good about the amount of lock-in vs the benefits of the service.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#59I’ve kind of anticipated this sentiment and have been thinking about providing Gitea hosting. Though I’ve been a little discouraged by Gitea’s release of their own cloud hosting service.
This blog post and the revenue growth at Gitlab over the last two quarters appear to be evidence of people wanting to moving away from GitHub (though their earnings report attribute the growth to other initiatives, clearly I had no real insight on this). As an extension of my self hosting of Mastodon efforts from last year I rolled up my other minor hosting efforts into https://hawt.cloud as a place to experiment with providing services like this.
This all ties in with the “Open Web” or “Small Web” sentiments I’ve seen expressed recently. The hyperscalers are locking more and more up into their ecosystems but there should still exist small vendors/hosting/service providers. They’ll never scale or be as reliable as the big guys but if they cease to exist a lot will be lost.
Re: Evaluating new software forges
#60> I hope they haven’t started down the slow and painful process of enshittification by following vague, ill-defined industry trends!
Has anyone else found themselves wondering if GitHub switched to a different web framework?
I feel like they moved further down the client-side rendering rabbit hole recently. Their UI feels increasingly janky to me. Several times a day I get a view of completely un-styled HTML that eventually organizes itself into the appropriate presentation.
For many scenarios, the GH web UI used to be preferable over navigating through visual studio because of how responsive it was. Now, I find the exact opposite to be true. I avoid the GH web UI as much as possible. VS2022 isn't great, but at least it's not implemented using react on top of some bullshit chrome wrapper.