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

Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

mediawiki.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 408 posts

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#61

Post by rock_hard »

nwah1 wrote: post #49
languagehacker wrote: post #40

In the past, I've found Gerrit to be reasonably good. Phabricator, on the other hand, not so much. Having worked with MediaWiki in the past on CRs, I think this will be a good move to modernize things for them. When faced with a similar task around the same time at Wikia (now Fandom), we chose GitHub while we were moving off of SVN. I'm glad we did at the time, even without all the additional features GitHub has. I u…

What features do you think Gitlab lacks compared to GitHub? I haven't used the CI/CD features of either, but PR/MR features seem comparable. Is it the advanced workflow stuff and CI/CD integration where GitHub is better? Bots? I think git in general should copy the approach of Fossil and include issue management and wikis along with the repo, to keep things consistent and avoid vendor lock-in. But I would be a lot mo…

Gitlab is worse on almost every angle compared to Github

It simply lacks the attention to detail...you can tell that Github walks the extra mile to get the UX right.

We used Gitlab for a year and then migrated to Github...it’s a joy!

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#62

Post by boogies »

nwah1 wrote: post #49
languagehacker wrote: post #40

In the past, I've found Gerrit to be reasonably good. Phabricator, on the other hand, not so much. Having worked with MediaWiki in the past on CRs, I think this will be a good move to modernize things for them. When faced with a similar task around the same time at Wikia (now Fandom), we chose GitHub while we were moving off of SVN. I'm glad we did at the time, even without all the additional features GitHub has. I u…

What features do you think Gitlab lacks compared to GitHub? I haven't used the CI/CD features of either, but PR/MR features seem comparable. Is it the advanced workflow stuff and CI/CD integration where GitHub is better? Bots? I think git in general should copy the approach of Fossil and include issue management and wikis along with the repo, to keep things consistent and avoid vendor lock-in. But I would be a lot mo…

> I think git in general should copy the approach of Fossil and include issue management and wikis along with the repo, to keep things consistent and avoid vendor lock-in.

It does include git send-mail, and I think Sourcehut’s use of that for issues is nice (and they quote customer claims that “SourceHut mailing lists are the best thing since the invention of reviewing patches.”).

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#63

Post by darkcha0s »

nwah1 wrote: post #49
languagehacker wrote: post #40

In the past, I've found Gerrit to be reasonably good. Phabricator, on the other hand, not so much. Having worked with MediaWiki in the past on CRs, I think this will be a good move to modernize things for them. When faced with a similar task around the same time at Wikia (now Fandom), we chose GitHub while we were moving off of SVN. I'm glad we did at the time, even without all the additional features GitHub has. I u…

What features do you think Gitlab lacks compared to GitHub? I haven't used the CI/CD features of either, but PR/MR features seem comparable. Is it the advanced workflow stuff and CI/CD integration where GitHub is better? Bots? I think git in general should copy the approach of Fossil and include issue management and wikis along with the repo, to keep things consistent and avoid vendor lock-in. But I would be a lot mo…

Let's not kid ourselves here, it's because GH is owned by MS.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#64

Post by nemetroid »

js2 wrote: post #12
epistasis wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What advantages do you see in Gerrit? Do they require a lot of experience in order to be realized?

I much prefer the model of force-pushing your development branch to create change sets. It lets you more easily see how development evolves in response to feedback. And the final state of the branch which gets merged leaves all the in-progress work that no one cares about behind only in Gerrit. With Github/lab's model, if you force push your PR, you lose the ability to view its previous state and diff against that. A…

> With Github/lab's model, if you force push your PR, you lose the ability to view its previous state and diff against that.

That's not quite true. Gitlab lets you compare any two "versions" of the force pushed branch.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#65

Post by Cthulhu_ »

zimpenfish wrote: post #44
svrb wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software should be written for users, not non-users. You'd think this would be self-evident and yet here we are.

How do you then convert a non-user into a user with the least friction?

Force. I for one never looked at Gerrit and thought "I should push this at my employer". I'll probably never use it unless I'm forced to.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#66

Post by oconnor663 »

jancsika wrote: post #53

Anyone thinking of moving to their own Gitlab instance with Gitlab CE-- either stay on Github or prepare to waste your time dealing with user spam bots that pollute your site's search results. In other words-- if you want the common use case for a FOSS project: 1. publicly viewable main repository with publicly viewable issue tracker 2. requirement to log in to view all snippets, user profiles, perhaps even other rep…

Is it possible to configure a robots.txt file to accomplish #2?

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#67

Post by 0x0 »

js2 wrote: post #12
epistasis wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What advantages do you see in Gerrit? Do they require a lot of experience in order to be realized?

I much prefer the model of force-pushing your development branch to create change sets. It lets you more easily see how development evolves in response to feedback. And the final state of the branch which gets merged leaves all the in-progress work that no one cares about behind only in Gerrit. With Github/lab's model, if you force push your PR, you lose the ability to view its previous state and diff against that. A…

Gitlab DOES let you compare different versions of changesets in a merge request: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/merge_requests/versi...

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#68

Post by krelian »

I never checked out gitlab but the name always made it seem like a github copycat. If you want to differentiate your product why not choose a name that rings different to your competitor?

And now I finally went and browsed some repositories and it's clear as that they were very much "inspired" but Github's design, it's practically a github clone, at least in that regard (although something is a bit off in the smoothness)

Maybe one day I'll find myself in a similar position and see things differently but this blatant copying always seemed ridiculous to the point where I would feel ashamed to lead this type of strategy.

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#69

Post by [deleted] »

jancsika wrote: post #53

Anyone thinking of moving to their own Gitlab instance with Gitlab CE-- either stay on Github or prepare to waste your time dealing with user spam bots that pollute your site's search results. In other words-- if you want the common use case for a FOSS project: 1. publicly viewable main repository with publicly viewable issue tracker 2. requirement to log in to view all snippets, user profiles, perhaps even other rep…

[deleted]

Re: Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab

#70

Post by jefftk »

jancsika wrote: post #53

Anyone thinking of moving to their own Gitlab instance with Gitlab CE-- either stay on Github or prepare to waste your time dealing with user spam bots that pollute your site's search results. In other words-- if you want the common use case for a FOSS project: 1. publicly viewable main repository with publicly viewable issue tracker 2. requirement to log in to view all snippets, user profiles, perhaps even other rep…

Can you say more about how it's a problem if people can view things without logging in? Naively I would have seen that as a plus.
Post reply on HN