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

Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 356 posts

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#111

Post by AWildDHHAppears »

Interesting. For projects that don't need a "community" we've been using Amazon CodeCommit.

We don't like to use Github anymore because of the politics there. Example: We had a project involving software filters that included this sentence in the description:

> Phase is related to time, but a pure time delay does not involve any phase shift. A pure time delay or "group delay" is constant with frequency. Phase shift varies with frequency and can advance or retard as the frequency changes.

We got a note from a woman who works at github who was apparently scanning open source projects for "offensive" words. Our project was flagged for the use of the word "retard".

We removed our project and never used github again.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#112

Post by matthewmacleod »

AWildDHHAppears wrote: post #111

Interesting. For projects that don't need a "community" we've been using Amazon CodeCommit. We don't like to use Github anymore because of the politics there. Example: We had a project involving software filters that included this sentence in the description: > Phase is related to time, but a pure time delay does not involve any phase shift. A pure time delay or "group delay" is constant with frequency. Phase shift v…

We removed our project and never used github again.

That seems like a totally disproportionate approach versus responding with a polite 'this is a legitimate use of the word, thanks' message.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#113

Post by akitaonrails »

krautsourced wrote: post #32

I really liked Gitlab when last I tried it, but in the end I went with https://gogs.io/ instead. For a small-ish team this felt like the most straight forward self-hosted solution. Still missing LFS though, which sucks, but it's being worked on.

I am using LFS on GitLab right now, works perfectly and I mention it in the article.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#114

Post by Zecc »

krautsourced wrote: post #32

I really liked Gitlab when last I tried it, but in the end I went with https://gogs.io/ instead. For a small-ish team this felt like the most straight forward self-hosted solution. Still missing LFS though, which sucks, but it's being worked on.

I couldn't help noticing Gogs is hosted on GitHub...

  https://github.com/gogits/gogs

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#115

Post by tiimo »

chrisan wrote: post #29

How about costs compared to Bitbucket? I appreciate what you guys are doing but I think Github is cashing in on their brand and for a while they had the best UX (they still might! but I no longer care anymore as all the competitors are "good enough" for me) which lets them set a high premium people will pay. However, I think it's unfair to leave out Bitbucket, they have come a long way. The first example of 8 develop…

If availability, security, backups etc. are highly critical for you and you don't want to host yourself, you could also have a look at our GitLab hosting service called GitHost (https://githost.io). It gives you your own private and secure GitLab instance on DigitalOcean which is completely maintained by us.

GitHost for teams of up to 100 is $80/month.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#116

Post by akitaonrails »

AWildDHHAppears wrote: post #111

Interesting. For projects that don't need a "community" we've been using Amazon CodeCommit. We don't like to use Github anymore because of the politics there. Example: We had a project involving software filters that included this sentence in the description: > Phase is related to time, but a pure time delay does not involve any phase shift. A pure time delay or "group delay" is constant with frequency. Phase shift v…

This was also one important reason why I am switching. The price, the enjoyment of hacking are primary reasons, but the politics pathway bothers me as well.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#117

Post by ep103 »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #112
AWildDHHAppears wrote: post #111

Interesting. For projects that don't need a "community" we've been using Amazon CodeCommit. We don't like to use Github anymore because of the politics there. Example: We had a project involving software filters that included this sentence in the description: > Phase is related to time, but a pure time delay does not involve any phase shift. A pure time delay or "group delay" is constant with frequency. Phase shift v…

We removed our project and never used github again. That seems like a totally disproportionate approach versus responding with a polite 'this is a legitimate use of the word, thanks' message.

I would agree with you, if it weren't for all the other articles that have come out about politics and github.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#119

Post by merb »

zegerjan wrote: post #88
merb wrote: post #65

We moved from BitBucket on premise to GitLab CE on premise. Actually most things now just works. Updating is a breeze. Instead of downloading a installer and copying / fixing server.xml we can just do a apt update && apt upgrade -y. Some things are a little bit akward but BitBucket didn't had this, too: - FF only merges is only EE (too bad that would be a really major selling point even for CE, squash button would be…

> - CI is a little limited compared to a full blown Jenkins - We hit a CI bug which still shows up "Running" Pipelines Do you have more examples of workflows we are not supporting at all or well enough? > - Artifacts API is limited to everything or nothing Right you are, you might want to track this issue[1]. > - CI Stages can be defined as trigger only but you can't have multiple triggers that starting different thi…

Not supported Workflows: - JUnit XML or similar output reading to have a nice output what's broken / worked - Checkstyle output / pylint / tools for other languages - What I said about Artifacts - Artifacts are hard to Track I already wrote into [1] which would also be a good way - Actually external Triggers can't be conditional:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/19826

So either that or have a way to name triggers which I opened here:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/20574

And I guess these are the things my company does / did with jenkins.

There is also another downside but we don't do that anymore: You can't push from CI to master branches, some people do tag and create builds with their CI / CD (which we also did) but now we just push a Tag to the Repo and the CI will be: '- only: tags' and catch that up.

That's all stuff I can think of now which is probably not supported by most "simple" CI / CD Tools. I guess only the big one's have such a thing like TeamCity, Jenkins and Bamboo.

Re: Moving to GitLab: Yes, it's worth it

#120

Post by matthewmacleod »

ep103 wrote: post #117
matthewmacleod wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We removed our project and never used github again. That seems like a totally disproportionate approach versus responding with a polite 'this is a legitimate use of the word, thanks' message.

I would agree with you, if it weren't for all the other articles that have come out about politics and github.

People on the internet will make lots of noise about everything; paying undue attention to it is a bit silly, IMO.
Post reply on HN