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

Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 468 posts

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#41

Post by jdub »

CodeAndCuffs wrote: post #21

If an org is heavily invested in GitHub Actions and GitHub App integrations, is self-hosting GitHub enterprise the only practical option?

Buildkite has built a GitHub Actions adapter... a good first step out of the GitHub Actions supply chain attack trap.

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#44

Post by petcat »

enriquto wrote: post #17

my favourites are sourcehut (that has excellent ci, and does not try to be a github clone) and codeberg (with slightly more straightforward migration path from github) [0] sr.ht [1] codeberg.org

Does sourcehut still require patches via email instead of "pull requests"? That was the deal breaker for me last time I looked at it.

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#45

Post by Pxtl »

A big thing with Github its the unified functionality across most of the OSS world - that we can search across all projects, leverage pipeline actions from other projects, and easily have a single dashboard for our own contributions and interests across all projects.

I'd hate to see a move to forge balkanization lose this functionality. But this would not be heavyweight data to federate. So are there any forges with a good story for federation?

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#46

Post by Arrowmaster »

bobkb wrote: post #27
polycaster wrote: post #8

https://forgejo.org/

Is their CI and CD workflow robust like gitlab/github ?

You can use any CI/CD you want. The only reason GH is popular is that it's free for public repos.

But Forgejo does have a GH like CI/CD. If you really care about good CI/CD then you should try some of the alternatives out and decide what works best for your needs.

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#47

Post by gritzko »

I strongly disagree with the assumption that GitHub's alternative is another centralized forge. Git itself is perfectly decentralized, as was the original Linux kernel development process. How people managed to put all their eggs in one intermittently available service is beyond me. Moving the eggs into another bucket is not a solution (like Microsoft is short of servers). The SPoF is the problem. There are plumbing, porcelain and "github" layers. The "github" part has to be decentralized as well. Then, using a particular forge will be a choice of convenience, not necessity. https://replicated.live/blog/crdt

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#48

Post by vinnymac »

bobkb wrote: post #27
polycaster wrote: post #8

https://forgejo.org/

Is their CI and CD workflow robust like gitlab/github ?

If you know GitHub actions then you’ll immediately understand Forgejo actions. It was designed that way intentionally. There are some differences, but at least for me not enough to warrant any pitchforks.

If you have advanced use cases you might be more frustrated, but I’m not aware of any off the top of my head. I think my biggest complaint is that they haven’t exposed action logs over the API, so I can’t build tooling around them at the CLI level, feed them to an LLM, or more quickly diagnose problems that arise without using the website.

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#49

Post by cobertos »

bobkb wrote: post #27
polycaster wrote: post #8

https://forgejo.org/

Is their CI and CD workflow robust like gitlab/github ?

It's based on act[0] so it's quite like GitHub actions but not completely [1].

I found in the current version of Forgejo the most secure way to set it up was just to put the runner on a different host. There's a Docker in Docker setup [2] that was challenging to get working correctly but still didn't quite feel secure...

After setting it all up, I'm convinced GitHub actions as a concept is flawed. I wish the community would make a simpler git-defined CI/CD that didn't have the crazy surface area that actions does... Named shell scripts that can call out to other stuff in the runner Docker image and report it to the UI would be a nice start.

[0]: https://github.com/nektos/act

[1]: https://forgejo.org/docs/v15.0/user/actions/github-actions/#...

[2]: https://forgejo.org/docs/v15.0/admin/actions/docker-access/#...

Post reply on HN