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

Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

gitea.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 241 posts

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#221

Post by scaryclam »

johnsea wrote: post #57
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't switch. Long story short: Gogs was slow in committing pull requests. The maintainer says it's because he has specific standards, the community sees it as just slowness. Anyway Gogs was forked into a new version that is supposed to be more active and well maintained. Well the forking lit a fire under the ass of the Gogs maintainer and he has since become much more active than he was. For a month there there was…

+1. About two years ago I switched to gitea but then switched back. gogs has (had?) slightly less features but seemed more polished. No issues since then, I'm glad to run again the original.

A quick question, how simple is it to switch from one to the other? Do you need to ditch all of the metadata each time? (pull requests, issues, users, etc).

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#222

Post by erikb »

tscs37 wrote: post #203
erikb wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, let's call it not "feature list" but "specified vision statement" and then it should have that. It should be quite clear from the main README and the main website what distinguishes this project from others. Otherwise it's quite likely that such specification doesn't exist and goals are unclear, which usually means bloated blobb of unfinished 10 million "features".

There is a milestone system setup on github which tracks when features will be introduced into master and such, so I wouldn't call it a lack of a vision statement. I don't think a vision statement is necessary either since I'm a fan of developing software primarly for dogfooding, fixing problems you have is probably a good way to improve the software for others.

It isn't though. People will make stupid demands, not because they are stupid, but because they don't incorporate previous decisions taken and they don't incorporate how their desired solution affects other users of the whole system. Last but not least having a 1000 feature blobb doesn't help anybody.

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#223

Post by h1d »

megous wrote: post #97

That was a painless installation. Seriously, this is something to immitate if you mean for your self-hosted application to be widely used. If only other self-hosted/distributed projects were this easy to install. I skiped on discourse, mastodon, gitlab, etc. because they were all pain to setup on a base linux system.

Not sure if you missed the official installation doc for Discourse but it recommends you to install via docker and with it, it's a 10 minute work. Not sure how faster can it be.

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#224

Post by johnsea »

scaryclam wrote: post #221
johnsea wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1. About two years ago I switched to gitea but then switched back. gogs has (had?) slightly less features but seemed more polished. No issues since then, I'm glad to run again the original.

A quick question, how simple is it to switch from one to the other? Do you need to ditch all of the metadata each time? (pull requests, issues, users, etc).

(can only tell my past situation, don't know how it is in general and today)

From gogs to gitea all metadata has been taken over (db was identical then). -- For gitea to gogs I read that the two projects have diverted. As I could afford to loose metadata of my not too many projects, I went back to gogs ditching and recreating everything (wrong switching decisions should be punished, don't they;).

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#225

Post by mcny »

pythonaut_16 wrote: post #164
striking wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A handful of lines added to the prescribed docker-compose file ( https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/install-with-docker/ ) and you're actually there. You would probably want to wrap it with nginx outside of docker-compose; attaching Certbot to it is thankfully very pleasant ( https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-secu... ). To integrate with SendGrid, you'd set the app.ini ( https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/con…

Check out projects like Traefik ( https://github.com/containous/traefik ) as well. Traefik is a reverse proxy that can automatically configure routes based on labels on your docker containers, and automatically setup Let's Encrypt certs for your subdomains. E.g. I add a label to my Gitea container to say "Serve this from git.mydomain.com", and Traefik will start redirecting requests and automatically configure a Let'…

Can you point me to a resource to do this? I have played with traefik before but I only served multiple websites on different ports. Thank you!

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#226

Post by pythonaut_16 »

mcny wrote: post #225
pythonaut_16 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out projects like Traefik ( https://github.com/containous/traefik ) as well. Traefik is a reverse proxy that can automatically configure routes based on labels on your docker containers, and automatically setup Let's Encrypt certs for your subdomains. E.g. I add a label to my Gitea container to say "Serve this from git.mydomain.com", and Traefik will start redirecting requests and automatically configure a Let'…

Can you point me to a resource to do this? I have played with traefik before but I only served multiple websites on different ports. Thank you!

This is the guide I used to set up my VPS: https://docs.traefik.io/user-guide/docker-and-lets-encrypt/

Basically you have all of your containers join the Docker network that your Traefik container is running on. Each container needs to expose a port (but not bind to the parent). The Traefik container will bind to port 80 on the parent. That guide should explain everything.

Let me know if you have any other questions or get stuck, I'd be happy to try and help!

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#227

Post by jhasse »

mi100hael wrote: post #194
colemickens wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any hopes of them un-forking? I haven't followed those communities, not sure where such discussions might be happening. Also, thanks for noting this. I had the mental perception that Gogs had really been fully surpassed by Gitea, and I need to re-evaluate now. Thanks.

> Is there any hopes of them un-forking? Doubtful. IIRC it was somewhat of a hostile & opportunistic fork. The Gogs maintainer went on vacation or something and didn't reply to issues for a couple weeks so someone forked to Gitea and declared themselves the new mainline only for the Gogs maintainer to return and not appreciate the attempted usurpation.

I think it was more than a couple of weeks. Also before the fork the maintainer was asked multiple times to allow other contributors to become co-maintainer to reduce the bus factor.

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#228

Post by jhasse »

pulse7 wrote: post #136
dahhowl wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate?

Gogs author didn't want to incorporate proposed changes into Gogs, so a bunch of other developers forked Gogs and went on their own promoting Gitea as true open-source by spirit and blamed Gogs author for his inflexibility. I am using Gogs, becuase it has all I need (Gitea is too little added value for me)...

That's just not true (or rather not the only reason). The Gogs maintainer went away for months with no sign of life. He also was the only one with write access to the gogs repository on GitHub which often resulted in no progress for months because of his disappearances.

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#229

Post by mbreese »

mschuster91 wrote: post #88
jancsika wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] and implement competent things like competent CI [...] I've got an OSX build box with a bunch of virtualbox VMs so I can build for Gnu/Linux (i386, x86_64, and arm), OSX, and Windows. Single slow box, so one runner at a time. It has to be running OSX because I haven't found any way to run an OSX VM on any other platform. I want to trigger CI on Gitlab merge requests. What does $competent_CI expand to?

> It has to be running OSX because I haven't found any way to run an OSX VM on any other platform. It is fairly easy to get decent OS X virtualization using Debian as base OS and QEMU-KVM for virtualization. You won't have niceties such as GPU acceleration but it will work. Search for "OSX KVM" on Google, it will take you where you want - unfortunately a direct link would expose me to legal liabilities. Also, be warn…

As far as I know, there isn’t anything that goes against using OSX in a VM in the EULA — so long as your host runs on Mac hardware. I don’t think you even need to use OSX as the primary OS in the machine.

That’s an admittedly big caveat, but also one of the reasons why virtualizing OSX works in the first place.

Re: Gitea: Open source, self-hosted GitHub alternative

#230

Post by aleksi »

jhasse wrote: post #227
mi100hael wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there any hopes of them un-forking? Doubtful. IIRC it was somewhat of a hostile & opportunistic fork. The Gogs maintainer went on vacation or something and didn't reply to issues for a couple weeks so someone forked to Gitea and declared themselves the new mainline only for the Gogs maintainer to return and not appreciate the attempted usurpation.

I think it was more than a couple of weeks. Also before the fork the maintainer was asked multiple times to allow other contributors to become co-maintainer to reduce the bus factor.

Sounds like Redmine / ChiliProject from a few years ago: https://www.chiliproject.org/projects/chiliproject/wiki/Why_... ChiliProject is dead now, but Redmine continues to live on.
Post reply on HN