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

You already have a Git server

maurycyz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 454 posts

Re: You already have a Git server

#371

Post by tweetle_beetle »

chipsrafferty wrote: post #292
jasode wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Having a web interface It's not the interface , it's the web hosting . People want a free destination server that's up 24/7 to store their repository. If it was only the web interface, people could locally install GitLab or Gitea to get a web browser UI. (Or use whatever modern IDE code editor to have a GUI instead of a CLI for git commands.) But doing that still doesn't solve what GitHub solves: a public server to…

No, actually it's the interface. Many companies would totally host it themselves, but the interface is what gives GH value.

GitLab is around a decade old, is a solid enterprise product and has always had a very similar interface to GitHub, at times even drawing criticism for being too similar. There's more to it than that.

Re: You already have a Git server

#372

Post by catmanjan »

BatteryMountain wrote: post #369

In interviews, I've literally asked senior devops engineers and senior software engineers if they have hosted their own git servers and how to initialise one and not a single one has mentioned git init --bare..... which is disconcerting. They can deploy appliances (like gitlab, gitea) and build pipelines just fine, but none of them realized how git actually works underneath and how simple it all is.

Why is that disconcerting? There's simply too much software to be familiar with obscure features like this

Re: You already have a Git server

#373

Post by jychang »

palata wrote: post #366
viraptor wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It didn't really lose the original ideas. It just never learned that people don't want to use it the way kernel devs want to use it. Git never provided an easy github-like experience, so GitHub took over. Turns out devs in general are not into the "setup completely independent public mailing lists for projects" idea.

> Turns out devs in general are not into the "setup completely independent public mailing lists for projects" idea. My feeling is that devs in general are not into the "learning how to use tools" idea. They don't want to learn the git basics, they don't want to learn the cmake basics, ... I mean that as an observation more than a criticism. But to me, the fact that git was designed for those who want to learn powerfu…

> My feeling is that devs in general are not into the "learning how to use tools" idea

Well, the devs learnt how to use Github, didn't they? Seems like people CAN learn things that are useful. I can also make the argument that Github pull requests are actually more powerful than git request-pull in addition to having a nicer UI/UX.

Being upset that people aren't using git request-pull is like the creator of Brainfuck being upset that scientists aren't using Brainfuck instead of something more powerful and has a better UI/UX like Python. It's kinda obvious which one is better to use...

Re: You already have a Git server

#374

Post by DrNefario »

eqvinox wrote: post #85

git clone ssh://username@hostname/path/to/repo this is equivalent to: git clone username@hostname:path/to/repo and if your usernames match between local and remote: git clone hostname:path/to/repo (if the path has no leading /, it is relative to your home directory on the remote)

Git also respects your `~/.shh/config`, which lets you change settings per host. I've set up each of my GitHub accounts with a different "host" so it's easy to switch between them.

Re: You already have a Git server

#375

Post by palata »

jychang wrote: post #373
palata wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Turns out devs in general are not into the "setup completely independent public mailing lists for projects" idea. My feeling is that devs in general are not into the "learning how to use tools" idea. They don't want to learn the git basics, they don't want to learn the cmake basics, ... I mean that as an observation more than a criticism. But to me, the fact that git was designed for those who want to learn powerfu…

> My feeling is that devs in general are not into the "learning how to use tools" idea Well, the devs learnt how to use Github, didn't they? Seems like people CAN learn things that are useful. I can also make the argument that Github pull requests are actually more powerful than git request-pull in addition to having a nicer UI/UX. Being upset that people aren't using git request-pull is like the creator of Brainfuck…

> Seems like people CAN learn things that are useful

I didn't say they could not.

Re: You already have a Git server

#376

Post by Cthulhu_ »

catmanjan wrote: post #372
BatteryMountain wrote: post #369

In interviews, I've literally asked senior devops engineers and senior software engineers if they have hosted their own git servers and how to initialise one and not a single one has mentioned git init --bare..... which is disconcerting. They can deploy appliances (like gitlab, gitea) and build pipelines just fine, but none of them realized how git actually works underneath and how simple it all is.

Why is that disconcerting? There's simply too much software to be familiar with obscure features like this

In a sense it's anything but obscure, that is, it's one of the most basic of features of the tool and the first thing (well, git init anyway) anyone ever uses.

But that's why people don't know about it, because they skip past the basics because in practice you never use it or need to know about it.

This is the reality of software engineering and the like though - mostly you learn what you need to know, because learning everything is usually wasteful and never used, and there's a lot available.

(I haven't been able to read documentation or a software book end to end in 20 years)

Re: You already have a Git server

#377

Post by maccard »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #286
thwarted wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter. They are centralized on servers that are ssh accessible, creating it is effectively mkdir and git init. It's not about how long the action takes, it's about how much the team responsible for that is loaded and can prioritize things. Every team needs more round tuits. Anyone who works in an IT support role knows this. The point is that they can self-service immediately and there is no actual depende…

But why can't the teams themselves do it? All places I've seen or been to have had teams able to create their own repositories, either they use cloud Git providers like Bitbucket, Gitlab or Github, or they have self hosted Gitlab, Github etc.

Lots of places (unfortunately) restrict repo creation, or CI pipeline creation. The platform team might need to spin up the standard stack for your project, VON access added for AWS environments etc etc. In the sorts of orgs where this happens doing it properly is more important than getting started.

Re: You already have a Git server

#378

Post by imron »

jonhohle wrote: post #98

I feel like something was lost along the way. git init —-bare will give you a git repo without a working set (just the contents typically in the .git directory). This allows you to create things like `foo.git` instead of `foo/.git`. “origin” is also just the default name for the cloned remote. It could be called anything, and you can have as many remotes as you’d like. You can even namespace where you push back to th…

GitHub is full of git anti-patterns

Re: You already have a Git server

#380

Post by nicce »

simonw wrote: post #324
nicce wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I imagine there's a way to setup a hook on your own server such that any pushes are then pushed to a GitHub copy without you having to do anything else yourself. For most people, that would defeat the purpose of self-hosting.

If your purpose for self-hosting is fear that GitHub will ignore their own promises in their terms of service and abuse their custody of your data then sure. https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-t... (There's also the "to comply with our legal obligations" bit, which is a concern if you're doing things that governments around the world may have issue with.) I expect there are people who like to…

> If your purpose for self-hosting is fear that GitHub will ignore their own promises in their terms of service and abuse their custody of your data then sure.

None of that protects against the U.S. laws or current political climate. There is no guarantee for EU citizen that GitHub processes data only in EU area or that data ever leaves it. So it is all about the data privacy.

Post reply on HN