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

If I could make my own GitHub

matduggan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 160 posts

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#51

Post by GCUMstlyHarmls »

faangguyindia wrote: post #44
nerdypepper wrote: post #8

> Well Y Does Some Of That yes but tangled.org really does do most of that! 1. JJ as the VCS: tangled supports stacked PRs using jj change-ids. https://blog.tangled.org/stacking , we use it a lot to build tangled itself: https://tangled.org/tangled.org/core/pulls 2. Raspberry pi as a forge for a long time: also check, the git server shim is super lightweight, its just an XRPC layer over git repositories + an sqlite3…

Both Radicle and Tangled miss the point; these are all for public collaborative work, but what about private repos? Many users work on side projects; they use GitHub private for this. Once you learn GitHub, then you also start public projects on GitHub. The point I am trying to make is, until you offer a user the ability to make a private repo for side projects, it's unlikely to take off. What people want is the abil…

Radicle supports private repos https://radicle.dev/guides/user#3-selectively-revealing-repo...

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#52

Post by [deleted] »

faangguyindia wrote: post #44
nerdypepper wrote: post #8

> Well Y Does Some Of That yes but tangled.org really does do most of that! 1. JJ as the VCS: tangled supports stacked PRs using jj change-ids. https://blog.tangled.org/stacking , we use it a lot to build tangled itself: https://tangled.org/tangled.org/core/pulls 2. Raspberry pi as a forge for a long time: also check, the git server shim is super lightweight, its just an XRPC layer over git repositories + an sqlite3…

Both Radicle and Tangled miss the point; these are all for public collaborative work, but what about private repos? Many users work on side projects; they use GitHub private for this. Once you learn GitHub, then you also start public projects on GitHub. The point I am trying to make is, until you offer a user the ability to make a private repo for side projects, it's unlikely to take off. What people want is the abil…

[deleted]

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#54

Post by lftherios »

Pay08 wrote: post #43
GCUMstlyHarmls wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Between Radicle, Tangled and Grasp, Radicle feels the coolest to me, emotionally, local first, p2p, for whatever reason it feels kind of nostalgic. Grasp is actually pretty cool too, built on nostr, which is maybe a stronger platform in the end? I dont really know enough about it. Stronger as in, you're maybe opening up more interoperablity by putting your stuff on a "anything network" vs Radicles "p2p git data netwo…

Graps seems neat in the way it forces you to sign your commits (which should really be standard practice) but I think Github itself has proven that interoperability is not that important.

In Radicle all code and social artifacts (issues, comments, patches etc.) are signed by default.

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#55

Post by Aeolun »

stavros wrote: post #22
corvad wrote: post #13

I really like Gerrit's workflow with diff reviews as opposed to pull requests, but unfortunately compared to something like gitea it lacks everything else we've come to expect from git hosting (issues, project planning, etc) which makes it seemingly a hard sell for many. I really wish there was a nice diff review platform kind of like phabricator but alas.

But why doesn't Gitea add it? It already has everything else, why are these forges always Github clones instead of doing more?

Well, if you are building one you generally want to support the 99% workflow, not the experimental one.

What part of gerrit is so different? Stacked PR’s work fine right (not in github, as a concept)

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#56

Post by tanh »

dust-jacket wrote: post #47

> PR approval is too boolean. The PR is approved or it's not approved. Real code review, like real life, lives in the middle This is have-your-cake-and-eat-it. PR approval is a permission so is a boolean. Of course it is. Either the code can be merged or it can't. What's being described really here is just something to make you feel slightly better about yourself whilst approving code you hate ("we should revisit thi…

This exists in Azure DevOps as Approve with Suggestions

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#58

Post by ahartmetz »

dust-jacket wrote: post #47

> PR approval is too boolean. The PR is approved or it's not approved. Real code review, like real life, lives in the middle This is have-your-cake-and-eat-it. PR approval is a permission so is a boolean. Of course it is. Either the code can be merged or it can't. What's being described really here is just something to make you feel slightly better about yourself whilst approving code you hate ("we should revisit thi…

Gerrit has -2...+2.

-2: This is a bad idea, don't do that

-1: This is a good idea but needs improvement

+1: LGTM but I don't have enough knowledge or authority to approve

+2: Approved

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#59

Post by JetSetIlly »

I think there's a gap in the market for a much simpler type of git service. All I need is a remote host to which I can push projects for others to see. I don't particularly want pull requests, actions or anything like that.

Maybe a way of facilitating "releases" with compiled binary assets (built locally and uploaded).

Forks can be handled by people cloning the repository and uploading a new project.

Re: If I could make my own GitHub

#60

Post by masa331 »

If i was making my own GitHub, i would make it possible to put one deploy keys to multiple repos, same as in Gitea. Why that doesn't work is beyond me and is a major pita with no simple work arounds
Post reply on HN