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

Migrating Dillo from GitHub

dillo-browser.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 219 posts

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#91

Post by Fnoord »

hk1337 wrote: post #81
Fnoord wrote: post #52

A good reason to move away from GitHub is it is from Microsoft (FAMAG; a company who kissed Trump's ring). Sourcehut is hosted in The Netherlands, and Codeberg in Germany.

What would be nice is an aggregator site one could submit to and everyone just host it on their own internet connection, and nobody be dependent on a source for hosting their projects. Maybe something like bluesky with the AT protocol but with git repositories.

For just text there's Usenet, Freenet, Mastodon. Though these work for more than merely text.

I suppose something like this with git and source code exists on Tor.

During the Arab Spring and Hong Kong protests, Bluetooth was used to share messages whilst the internet was cut off.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#92

Post by veeti »

homebrewer wrote: post #25
xrd wrote: post #19

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive! For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic. The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.…

Ease of maintenance is an even bigger difference. We've been using gitea for a bit over five years now, and gitlab for a few years before that, and gitea requires no maintenance in comparison. Upgrades come down to pulling the new version and restarting the daemon, and take just a few seconds. It's definitely the best solution for self-hosters who want to spend as little time as possible on their infrastructure. Back…

I guess I'll just chime in that while Gitlab is a very heavy beast, I have self hosted it for over a decade with little to no issues. It's pretty much as simple as installing their Omnibus package repository and doing apt install gitlab-ce.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#94

Post by xrd »

irusensei wrote: post #90
xrd wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, forgejo offers a built-in container registry? How does that work? I don't see that in the admin section at all.

Just run podman or docker login your.forgejo.instance.address then push to it as normal. An existing repo must exist. You can check the images under site administration -> packages. Speaking of authentication it also works as an openid provider meaning you can authenticate every other web software that supports it to Forgejo... which in turn can look for users in other sources. It also has wikis. Its an underrated pi…

That's so brilliant. Wow. I'm struggling to wrap my brain around how they not only support OCI (docker) but also APK (alpine) and APT (debian) packages. That's a very cool feature.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#96

Post by Kwpolska »

zdw wrote: post #45
xrd wrote: post #19

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive! For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic. The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.…

If you want even more minimal, Gerrit is structured as a Java app with no external dependencies like databases, and stores all it's configuration and runtime information on the filesystem, mostly as data structures in the git repos. Shared filesystems is all you need to scale/replicate it, and it also makes the backup process quite simple.

The deployment may be simple, but at the same time, the Gerrit code review workflow is terrible.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#97

Post by cxr »

bayindirh wrote: post #23
throwaway150 wrote: post #21

> Additionally, GitHub seems to encourage a "push model" in which you are notified when a new event occurs in your project(s), but I don't want to work with that model. Instead, I prefer it to work as a "pull model", so I only get updates when I specifically look for them. This model would also allow me to easily work offline. Unfortunately, I see that the same push model has been copied to alternative forges. Someon…

AFAIK, the author wants to work like how Source Hut and Linux kernel works: by e-mails. When you're working with e-mails, you sync your relevant IMAP box to local, pulling all the proposed patches with it, hence the pull model. Then you can work through the proposed changes offline, handle on your local copy and push the merged changes back online.

Reminder that POP and IMAP are protocols, and nothing stops a code forge—or any other website—from exposing the internal messaging/notification system to users as a service on the standard IMAP ports; no one is ever required to set up a bridge/relay that sends outgoing messages to, say, the user's Fastmail/Runbox/Proton/whatever inbox. You can just let the user point their IMAP client to _your_ servers, authenticate with their username and password, and fetch the contents of notifications that way. You don't have to implement server-to-server federation typically associated with email (for incoming messages), and you don't have to worry about deliverability for outgoing mail.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#98

Post by blueflow »

the__alchemist wrote: post #3

We are in the disapora phase; there is a steady stream of these announcements, each with a different GitHub alternative. I speculate that within a few months, the communities will have settled on a single dominant one. I'm curious if it will be one of the existing ones, or something new. Perhaps a well-known company or individual will announce one; it will have good marketing, and dominate.

The settling on a dominant one does not happen - self-hosting becomes more popular.

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#99

Post by IgorPartola »

xrd wrote: post #19

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive! For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic. The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.…

What exactly is the advantage of running something like GitLab vs what I do which is just a server with SSH and a file system? To create a new repo I do:

  ssh example.com ‘mkdir repos/my-proj.git && cd repos/my-proj.git && git init —bare .’
Then I just set my remote origin URL to example.com:repos/my-proj.git

The filesystem on example.com is backed up daily. Since I do not need to send myself pull requests for personal projects and track my own TODOs and issues via TODO.md, what exactly am I missing? I have been using GitHub for open source projects and work for years but for projects where I am the only author, why would I need a UI besides git and my code editor of choice?

Re: Migrating Dillo from GitHub

#100

Post by tclancy »

WD-42 wrote: post #30

> To avoid this problem, I created my own bug tracker software, buggy, which is a very simple C tool that parses plain Markdown files and creates a single HTML page for each bug. The hacker spirit alive and well.

For better and for worse.
Post reply on HN