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

Migrating Dillo from GitHub

dillo-browser.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 219 posts

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#21

Post by throwaway150 »

> Additionally, GitHub seems to encourage a "push model" in which you are notified when a new event occurs in your project(s), but I don't want to work with that model. Instead, I prefer it to work as a "pull model", so I only get updates when I specifically look for them. This model would also allow me to easily work offline. Unfortunately, I see that the same push model has been copied to alternative forges.

Someone kind enough to explain this to me? What's the difference between push model and pull model? What about push model makes it difficult to work offline?

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#22

Post by blibble »

simonw wrote: post #18
simonw wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to hear the inside story of GitHub's migration of their core product features to React. It clearly represents a pretty seismic cultural change within the company. GitHub was my go-to example of a sophisticated application that loaded fast and didn't require JavaScript for well over a decade. The new React stuff is sluggish even on a crazy fast computer. My guess is that the "old guard" who made the original…

In answer to my own question about in-depth decision making, I just found this presentation from February 2025 by seven-year GitHub veteran Joel Hawksley: https://hawksley.org/2025/02/10/lessons-from-5-years-of-ui-a... Relevant quote: > But beyond accessibility and availability, there is also a growing expectation of GitHub being more app-like. > The first case of this was when we rebuilt GitHub projects. Customers w…

github is a tool used where code is written: on desktop computers

no-one cares about the github mobile experience

microsoft making the windows 8 mistake all over again

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#23

Post by bayindirh »

throwaway150 wrote: post #21

> Additionally, GitHub seems to encourage a "push model" in which you are notified when a new event occurs in your project(s), but I don't want to work with that model. Instead, I prefer it to work as a "pull model", so I only get updates when I specifically look for them. This model would also allow me to easily work offline. Unfortunately, I see that the same push model has been copied to alternative forges. Someon…

AFAIK, the author wants to work like how Source Hut and Linux kernel works: by e-mails.

When you're working with e-mails, you sync your relevant IMAP box to local, pulling all the proposed patches with it, hence the pull model.

Then you can work through the proposed changes offline, handle on your local copy and push the merged changes back online.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#24

Post by throwaway150 »

bayindirh wrote: post #23
throwaway150 wrote: post #21

> Additionally, GitHub seems to encourage a "push model" in which you are notified when a new event occurs in your project(s), but I don't want to work with that model. Instead, I prefer it to work as a "pull model", so I only get updates when I specifically look for them. This model would also allow me to easily work offline. Unfortunately, I see that the same push model has been copied to alternative forges. Someon…

AFAIK, the author wants to work like how Source Hut and Linux kernel works: by e-mails. When you're working with e-mails, you sync your relevant IMAP box to local, pulling all the proposed patches with it, hence the pull model. Then you can work through the proposed changes offline, handle on your local copy and push the merged changes back online.

All of this makes sense. Thank you for explaining. I don't think I understand the difference though.

Like are they calling the "GitHub pull request" workflow as the push model? What is "push" about it though? I can download all the pull request patches to my local and work offline, can't I?

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#25

Post by homebrewer »

xrd wrote: post #19

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive! For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic. The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.…

Ease of maintenance is an even bigger difference. We've been using gitea for a bit over five years now, and gitlab for a few years before that, and gitea requires no maintenance in comparison. Upgrades come down to pulling the new version and restarting the daemon, and take just a few seconds. It's definitely the best solution for self-hosters who want to spend as little time as possible on their infrastructure.

Backups are handled by zfs snapshots (like every other server).

We've also had at least 10× lower downtime compared to github over the same period of time, and whatever downtime we had was planned and always in the middle of the night. Always funny reading claims here that github has much better uptime than anything self-hosted from people who don't know any better. I usually don't even bother responding anymore.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#26

Post by Y_Y »

hshdhdhj4444 wrote: post #10
diath wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that pretty much GitLab? But then most people still prefer GitHub anyway.

Gitlab is worse than GitHub in every way. At least GitHub adds new features over time. Gitlab has been removing features in favor of more expensive plans even after explicitly saying they wouldn’t do so.

> At least GitHub adds new features over time.

Not as quickly as they add anti-features, imho.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#27

Post by bayindirh »

throwaway150 wrote: post #24
bayindirh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK, the author wants to work like how Source Hut and Linux kernel works: by e-mails. When you're working with e-mails, you sync your relevant IMAP box to local, pulling all the proposed patches with it, hence the pull model. Then you can work through the proposed changes offline, handle on your local copy and push the merged changes back online.

All of this makes sense. Thank you for explaining. I don't think I understand the difference though. Like are they calling the "GitHub pull request" workflow as the push model? What is "push" about it though? I can download all the pull request patches to my local and work offline, can't I?

GitHub pull request pushes you a notification/e-mail to handle the merge, and you have to handle the pull request mostly online.

I don't know how you can download the pull request as a set of patches and work offline, but you have to open a branch, merge the PR to that branch, test the things and merge that branch to relevant one.

Or you have to download the forked repository, do your tests to see the change is relevant/stable whatnot and if it works, you can then merge the PR.

---

edit: Looks like you can get the PR as a patch or diff, and is trivial, but you have to be online again to get it that way. So, getting your mails from your box is not enough, you have to get every PR as a diff, with a tool or manually. Then you have to organize them. e-mails are much more unified and simple way to handle all this.

---

In either case, reviewing the changes is not possible when you're offline, plus the pings of the PRs is distracting, if your project is popular.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#28

Post by adamcharnock »

xrd wrote: post #19

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive! For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic. The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.…

We've been looking at Forgejo too. Do you have any experience with Forgejo Actions you can share? That is one thing we are looking at with a little trepidation.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#29

Post by c-hendricks »

homebrewer wrote: post #25
xrd wrote: post #19

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive! For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic. The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.…

Ease of maintenance is an even bigger difference. We've been using gitea for a bit over five years now, and gitlab for a few years before that, and gitea requires no maintenance in comparison. Upgrades come down to pulling the new version and restarting the daemon, and take just a few seconds. It's definitely the best solution for self-hosters who want to spend as little time as possible on their infrastructure. Back…

When I self hosted gitlab I never found the maintenance to be that bad, just change a version in a compose.yml, sometimes having to jump between blessed versions if I've missed a few back to back.

Like others, I've switch to Gitea, but whenever I do visit gitlab I can't help but think the design / UX is so much nicer.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#30

Post by WD-42 »

> To avoid this problem, I created my own bug tracker software, buggy, which is a very simple C tool that parses plain Markdown files and creates a single HTML page for each bug.

The hacker spirit alive and well.

Post reply on HN