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

GitLab Pages

pages.gitlab.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 317 posts

Re: GitLab Pages

#251

Post by pitchka »

jobvandervoort wrote: post #123
pitchka wrote: post #43

Well, now if only I can change the max-age of some resources (images, css, js) it'll get better than github. Good job!

Can you elaborate and / or create an issue here [0]? [0]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/new

Cache headers are set to expire after 10 minutes at GitHub pages.

Which is a bit too restrictive on js, images or css files.

It would be nice if these cache headers could be set to a larger period (1 year, or something similar). I'm not certain if any engineering hurdles or dangers exist in doing so, and I'm not implying this is something that can easily be done - since obviously GitHub didn't do it for their Pages.

Re: GitLab Pages

#253

Post by hk__2 »

jeffwass wrote: post #203
catwell wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am usually in the Open Source camp, but I don't think the choice is so easy here. Not only does GitLab copy GitHub, it does so by relying on a lot of Open Source sofware written by GitHub and/or GitHub employees. You may like GitHub or not, but you cannot deny they contribute a lot to Open Source. I am not entirely sure how much that has changed since his resignation, but here is Tom Preston-Werner's position on Op…

>Not only does GitLab copy GitHub, it does so by relying on a lot of Open Source sofware written by GitHub and/or GitHub employees. That seems like a bizarre complaint, considering git itself is FOSS, initially written by Linus, and that GitHub's entire business is effectively built around hosting git repositories.

GitHub contributes back a lot to git itself.

Re: GitLab Pages

#255

Post by hk__2 »

rkangel wrote: post #236
brightball wrote: post #233

My only issue with Gitlab is that the entire product initially started off as a completely ripoff of Github. Considering what Github does for the open source community in general, that somewhat bothers me.

One of the founding principles of open source is that you can take a copy of someone's work and make changes to it (as long as you continue to make the changes public). Github isn't open source so the analogy doesn't quite hold, but they're creating something and giving it to the community (as well as building a business).

> One of the founding principles of open source is that you can take a copy of someone's work and make changes to it (as long as you continue to make the changes public)

Also as long as you acknowledge it. It’s acceptable to copy a FOSS project and make a new one on top of it but you have to mention it; you can’t just create a copycat and claim you invented everything by yourself, especially if you start making money off it (well some licences let you do that but that’s not ethical).

Re: GitLab Pages

#256

Post by amelius »

jobvandervoort wrote: post #242
gsmethells wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why did you guys choose Ceph instead of OpenStack Swift? Just curious.

I'm not sure whether we've seriously considered Swift, but high bandwidth is important to improving our performance, one area in which Ceph seems to be the better choice [0]. [0]: http://www.sparkmycloud.com/blog/a-performance-review-of-swi...

IIRC there was an issue (in Ceph) with performance in the case of many small files. Is that solved now?

Re: GitLab Pages

#258

Post by sdesol »

ianleeclark wrote: post #250
connorshea wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has integrated CI whereas GitHub requires using a third-party CI system, it's had Reaction Emoji (called Award Emoji for GitLab) for a while now, it has "Merge when build succeeds", CE is entirely FOSS, etc.

I'd honestly be really surprised if Github didn't end up acquiring one of those CI systems which they already integrate with.

I'd be surprised if they did. I really don't see a business reason for them doing so. They are clearly laser focused on enterprise, which means massively bespoked internal build systems and work flow. And they'll be competing against a lot of entrenched internal solutions.

GitLab and Atlassian have a pricing model for displacing existing systems and encouraging adoption, but I can't see GitHub following suit. GitHub looks to like they want to be the Apple in the Apple vs Android. Android has the largest user base but due to Apple's premium pricing, they have the largest profit.

Re: GitLab Pages

#259

Post by nixgeek »

dangrossman wrote: post #23
cornstalks wrote: post #5

This is awesome. One question I have in comparison to GitHub Pages is if a global CDN is used and if there is effective DDOS protection built in. GitHub has to deal with regular DDOS attacks, and I imagine GitLab will have a few too. GitHub does a pretty good job with it, but before I move to GitLab Pages I'd like to understand that better but didn't see that info anywhere.

GitLab's hosted on Azure. I don't think Azure will fall over to a DDOS, you'll just wake up to a hefty bandwidth bill.

Not all DDoS is volumetric, and even in volumetric attacks it can be complex to differentiate legitimate traffic from the noise being generated by the botnet.

Effective mitigation is about far more than "How big is your pipe?" so this comment reads as somewhat uninformed.

tl;dr - Azure does not have a magic button which someone pushes, fixes all kinds of attacks, and just charges you for this at $1175/hr whilst you sleep peacefully.

Re: GitLab Pages

#260

Post by mullingitover »

mynewtb wrote: post #72
sytse wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're working on adding Cloudflare in front of GitLab Pages in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/operations/issues/75 We don't have a lot of experience yet with DDOS protection so there might be downtime as we learn that. As you can see in the issue we're working to implement protection before we need it but it might not be ready in time nor can it protect against everything.

Please do not use Cloudflare. Their 'protection' against privacy aware Tor users makes accessing sites through incredibly painful.

In all fairness, Tor is something of a cesspool and cloudflare is doing the best they can[1].

[1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/the-trouble-with-tor/

Post reply on HN