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

281–290 of 317 posts

Re: GitLab Pages

#281

Post by djhn »

sneak wrote: post #268
bad_user wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several problems with it: 1. the certificate is not generated by you (in the Free or the Pro plan) but by them and these certificates are for multiple domain names. So you end up sharing your certificate with other domains / websites of dubious nature that are also on CloudFlare's network. 2. CloudFlare only secures the connection between users and the CloudFlare network. It does not secure the connection b…

Why is #1 an issue?

I've been wondering about this. I share mine with several shops that appear to be selling low-schedule drugs on the clearnet.

Don't know what the implications for that are, except that someone poking around the validity of my SSL certificate will establish that mine is a free tier Cloudflare one.

Re: GitLab Pages

#282

Post by spicyj »

kieranhunt wrote: post #278
sneak wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is #1 an issue?

If a domain that you share your certificate with has their certificate revoked or is blacklisted for any reason this could have a negative impact on you.

It's a single certificate that never leaves CloudFlare's hands so revocation seems unlikely and they'd manage it for you if anything came up.

Re: GitLab Pages

#283

Post by parallelist »

sneak wrote: post #266
dublinben wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the use of Tor is probably not all that important anyways Who are you to decide that my use of Tor is not important enough?

A site operator. It isn't censorship for someone to decide who they want to talk to. CF is simply giving site owners levers to use if they so choose. While I am a strong supporter of Tor, privacy, and anonymity, CF has done nothing wrong here by allowing site operators to selectively choose who they wish to serve to.

Sounds a lot like censorship to me. It's discrimination at the very least.

Re: GitLab Pages

#284

Post by masida »

I was wondering if GitLab provides a Markdown editor that could be used by non-technical users directly from the web interface? Something like Prose[1], Dillinger[2] or StackEdit[3].

Of course you could argue if it's in scope for a project like GitLab, but it means that I could use static site generators for projects where non-technical users need to edit the content without ever thinking about a CMS.

Would be nice:

- if it would also provide an easy upload/commit of images to some configurable directory from that Markdown editor;

- configure a content-editor user that's restricted to a subset of directories;

- allow the user to preview the full website without pushing to the live environment;

- use a tag or branch to mark the version that can be pushed to the live environment.

It would probably be the most flexible CMS that's available right now.

[1] https://prose.io/ [2] http://dillinger.io/ [3] https://stackedit.io/

Re: GitLab Pages

#285

Post by tiplus »

dominotw wrote: post #270
ianleeclark wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

There seems to be a healthy competition between various ci software that works with github. Why would github try to kill that and take on such a high touch area. Its quite puzzling why gitlab went that route, they are basically discouraging ci systems from integrating with them. I think this is would turn out to be a bad decision for gitlab.

Well, their CI is pretty good for starters... compared to self hosting jenkins, or paying for Travis CI. Self hosting gitlab integrated CI runners is a big plus for me.

As a third party service provider you could still host and/or modify those CI runners for specific tasks like node, go, etc.

Re: GitLab Pages

#286

Post by tragic »

echelon wrote: post #230
jobvandervoort wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're considering adopting the same policy, see the issue linked above.

That would be amazing. (I'm not sure why I got downvoted into oblivion. I stated my honest opinion--I haven't signed up for a lot of services where I can't use the username I want.)

Dude, I can't even use my preferred username here (it's too long).

Worse things happen at sea.

Re: GitLab Pages

#287

Post by mynewtb »

mullingitover wrote: post #260
mynewtb wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

Please consider https://blog.torproject.org/blog/trouble-cloudflare

Re: GitLab Pages

#288

Post by ferbivore »

parallelist wrote: post #283
sneak wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A site operator. It isn't censorship for someone to decide who they want to talk to. CF is simply giving site owners levers to use if they so choose. While I am a strong supporter of Tor, privacy, and anonymity, CF has done nothing wrong here by allowing site operators to selectively choose who they wish to serve to.

Sounds a lot like censorship to me. It's discrimination at the very least.

Spam filters are discrimination, but I don't see anyone suggesting we stop using those.

Re: GitLab Pages

#289

Post by erikrothoff »

parallelist wrote: post #283
sneak wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A site operator. It isn't censorship for someone to decide who they want to talk to. CF is simply giving site owners levers to use if they so choose. While I am a strong supporter of Tor, privacy, and anonymity, CF has done nothing wrong here by allowing site operators to selectively choose who they wish to serve to.

Sounds a lot like censorship to me. It's discrimination at the very least.

Then go after the site owners who choose to enable this.

Re: GitLab Pages

#290

Post by 59nadir »

hobs wrote: post #276
sneak wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, as much as I admire and respect his intelligence, sometimes Gruber can be quite unreasonable.

Yeah, after reading that I came away with a really REALLY sour taste in my mouth. What got stuck in his craw and died?

It's also especially annoying when you consider that Gruber seems opposed to the idea of anyone else fleshing out Markdown properly, but he's not doing anything himself. At some point what he did with Markdown was basically just squatting on it himself, making any improving of it at the source impossible.
Post reply on HN