Self-hosted Git Server

1. If you need to restart your server because patches, then you restart it. :)

2. Backups: AFAIK you can simply just backup /home/user that runs GitBucket. "To upgrade GitBucket, only replace gitbucket.war. All GitBucket data is stored in HOME/.gitbucket. So if you want to back up GitBucket data, copy this directory to the other disk."

3. "Since it's Java ... therefore security" yeah, you need to keep it updated, same goes for ALL software. Luckily I'm using an enterprise class distro which provides timely security updates and pays particular attention to Java (RHEL/CentOS).

Nothing is ever "simple", but running stuff yourself is not as hard as many people think, you just need to get a bit involved.

Ugh, I hate that the term "circle jerk" is being applied to "a place where people share things they have made."

Github is a self-described "social coding" website. If people did post code simply to show it off to others, do you feel this is better or worse than Facebook-esque low-content narcissism? I feel like you come to this with a feeling of superiority for some reason.

>In short, I will never get attention, but I hope to get understanding. I understand some people contribute for different reasons, but if you are on Github to get attention, the rest of "normalized" society is laughing at us anyway.

So what if people are on Github to get attention? Self-promotion can help you get a better job or help establish a reputation. The programming community is small and there's nothing wrong with wanting to participate.

However, I posit that people push to public-read Github so that their code gets attention. When I post code to my tech blog, the broadcast audience is small. When I post it to Github, anyone can see/critique/benefit/suggest changes/easily discuss it with context. That's pretty cool.

>I work in an IT department, and when I mention Github and source code and different languages, people stare at me like an alien.

If you work in an IT department where Github or code-review is strange, that's a different issue.

>I will never get attention anywhere, but Github is not making that better or worse.

I don't even know how to respond to this.

> Ugh, I hate that the term "circle jerk" is being applied to "a place where people share things they have made."

Well, I did not mean to sound superior. I do not think I can code well enough to look down at other people for coding ability. I just feel that people increasingly, like any social network, will work on projects on Github for attention and the content is questionable or strange. Social is transforming to a place to socialize, and the latter I do not like for Github or anywhere else for enthusiast programming.

Recently, I had an idea because I got sick of TinyTinyRSS, a PHP-based feed reader with some good mobile app integration. I wrote a small README, uploaded a SVG of the MySQL DB structure to get an idea, and had not written any of the Python I described. I received three stars a week later, and not a single line of code yet. How does that even make sense? My point is people go around look for attention without effort. Yes, I know this describes every social network. I dislike them. You can balk at that ironically, because I am here, ostensibly another social network in different orange wrapper. Nonetheless, the kind of voting and sometimes absurd comment threads in nerd wars, like the whole Node.js commit changing gender and the Joyent employee who lost his job over it, were disgusting. I understood both sides of that issue, but people were declaring there sides with superfluous commentary in the pull request comments, and the hundred or so comments supporting various views on women and IT and superfluous garbage showed it was a hot topic. No one wanted to debate the merits of the commit or how to handle the issue as it pertained to the Node community with that specific issue, of course. It was just an angry Facebookesque flameware on Github. I hoped I would not see Github turn into that. I foolishly assumed it would be a long time before I saw that because, like it or not, computer culture, especially open source stuff, is still fringe.

It is this that bothers me. Some people write cutesy meaningless libraries to get attention. I probably write garbage, code far worse than anyone of that ilk. But what I do not like is the stress Github is now turning the celebration of open programming and collaboration into, merely a celebrity contest. I cannot find the talk by one of the Node guys talking about how he started to be really affected by the number of stars he received on projects (and this is a guy that had projects in Node with sometimes three or four digits in his star count! I never broke more than 1, on anything). He said it ruined his focus drive and he had to re-center himself.

My point here, whether you disagree or not, is that a social network for coding does not mean a socializing network where it is playground for different cliques, with random bullies and popular kids looking down at you. Github is not that yet, but my point was that prioritizing attention-getting when working in open source projects seems quite contrary to me.

Ask Richard Hipp.

That's kind of the point of social coding. If I care and think that I can help your project, I'll suggest a solution that I'm capable of implementing (pull request).

>Social is transforming to a place to socialize, and the latter I do not like for Github or anywhere else for enthusiast programming.

No one is forcing you to do anything. You can post your code for others to see without interacting.

>I wrote a small README, uploaded a SVG of the MySQL DB structure to get an idea, and had not written any of the Python I described. I received three stars a week later, and not a single line of code yet. How does that even make sense?

Maybe someone liked your idea or starred it as a reminder to come back later.

>and the hundred or so comments supporting various views on women and IT and superfluous garbage showed it was a hot topic.

Political opinions don't require an understanding of the issue or any ability. To talk about code, the amount of ability and understanding increases with the complexity of the sample. Which is to say, of course the noise political discussion drowns out talk about coding because there's more potential participants.

>Some people write cutesy meaningless libraries to get attention.

So what?

>But what I do not like is the stress Github is now turning the celebration of open programming and collaboration into, merely a celebrity contest.

Do you think that this behavior comes from Github or its users?

>I never broke more than 1, on anything)

Earlier you said that you received multiple stars for a project you hadn't coded.

I'm going to stop responding because you're responding with anecdotes, some of which are fictitious.

The missing pieces (from my perspective) on GitBucket is that I can't use ssh keys for identification/authorization. I think GitHub, Gitolite, etc do this part right.

EDIT: Fossil always seemed interesting, and now there's Veracity which is missing IDE integration but seems to have all the server-client parts done correctly.