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

91–100 of 468 posts

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#92

Post by vinnymac »

mfenniak wrote: post #59
vinnymac wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 tool…

A basic API to access Actions logs was added in Forgejo v16. `/api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/jobs/{job_id}/logs`

Nice! I was hoping they would add this in v16. Unfortunately I am still on v15 of all my instances of Forgejo

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#93

Post by techknowlogick »

teekert wrote: post #5
dawn3727 wrote: post #3

You might want to consider checking out GitLab and Gitee.

You mean Gitea [0], a community-driven fork is Forgejo. There was some drama, have to admit is still don't really understand it (ask an llm I'd say). Codeberg [2] uses Forgejo and offers it as a hosted service. [0] https://about.gitea.com/ [1] https://forgejo.org/ [2] https://codeberg.org/

FWIW Gitea is still community driven as before, there are yearly elections for the community maintainers for TOC leadership.

disclaimer: I'm one of the project leads of Gitea

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#95

Post by techknowlogick »

woodrowbarlow wrote: post #58
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?

no; gitea and foregjo both support actions-style CI/CD and both serve mostly GH-compatible APIs and have GH-style apps. it's not 100% compatible (forgejo is a little more compatible than gitea [^1]), but many of your workflows might "just work" without even renaming the .github folder. ^1: in my recent experience, for my particular use cases

I'm one of the project leads of Gitea and we've put a ton of work into Gitea Actions, I'd be interested in any compatibility gaps that you've run into.

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#96

Post by axegon_ »

Anon1096 wrote: post #83
axegon_ wrote: post #55

I migrated everything to codeberg several months ago (and created an annual donation schedule). I was never a big fan of github but what ultimately pushed me to ditch it was the way github was shoving copilot/chatgpt in my face without me ever asking. Codeberg has a clear stance on that and it's a stance I can totally get behind. In addition I spun up forgejo at a server at home for very critical stuff and it's aweso…

Note: if your reason for switching is purely uptime, you will be sorely disappointed with codeberg Their own site reports the 2 week uptime at 1 nine https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg and I suspect if you use the (really terrible) across-all-product-offerings uptime methodology that people love to post for github it would be a 0 nines overall service.

The reason for switching was shoving all the slop down my throat, even when just browsing. There are a couple of things I have published and a handful of others I plan on open sourcing some day so for the purpose, codeberg does a brilliant job. For work - meh i'm in a corporate environment running internal repositories on company servers so that's less of an issue still.

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#98

Post by wongarsu »

plqbfbv wrote: post #37

To all of those proposing self-hosted GitLab: we did it for 6+ years in my company, and it's not always a smooth sailing. We had our own runners and we made it auto-upgrade across docker images daily before business start. It mostly worked really well, except those few times were a Docker upgrade had to be rolled back, or that one time the bundled pg_shared_buffers was set at 1MB by default, making schema upgrades im…

I'd also say that gitlab runners are the biggest failure point in gitlab and take some work to micro-manage. If I was setting up from scratch I would consider gitlab for source control, but some hosted service for CI

Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub

#99

Post by rwl »

sssilver wrote: post #56

If only there was a convention for storing PRs and issues and wiki inside the repository itself, similar to how Fossil[1] does it. Then all the GitHubs and Gitlabs of this world would be limited to just providing UI and would be unable to hold our data hostage by design. [1] https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki

I started using fossil recently and have been quite pleased with this aspect of it. I miss a few things from the git world (mostly magit and its magical ability to stage individual hunks of a diff) and there are a few rough edges, but I totally agree that having a wiki and issue tracking inside the repository makes so much sense. fossil‘s simplicity is a breath of fresh air for anyone who has to use git from a CLI. Well worth a try for anyone on the fence.
Post reply on HN