Apparently Gitlab and Bitbucket give you a feature to group repositories into projects while Github is lacking something similar.
How companies using Github handle their repositories when there are 100's of them?
1–10 of 34 posts
Apparently Gitlab and Bitbucket give you a feature to group repositories into projects while Github is lacking something similar.
How companies using Github handle their repositories when there are 100's of them?
I even have some crontab's to update all issues via git bug bridge locally, so that I don't need an internet connection to github.com to work on tickets. Clicks are not easily automated, so I avoid them for my workflows. Same for almost daily rebasing. (all feature and bugfix branches are automatically rebased to master, when master moves). This is 90% automatic.
All my repos are public, I pay nothing. I find that better than paying for it and keeping them private.
I have currently 375 repos under my user, plus about 20 more under different orgs. What's the exact problem to solve? Just avoiding to pay per user per org? I even have some crontab's to update all issues via git bug bridge locally, so that I don't need an internet connection to github.com to work on tickets. Clicks are not easily automated, so I avoid them for my workflows. Same for almost daily rebasing. (all featu…
Unfortunately, no solutions for grouping them.
[0]: https://registry.terraform.io/providers/integrations/github/...
We end up telling our teams to use the different search functions to help in making sense of the madness: search by language (automatically detected by GitHub), team, type (forks or other), topics and names. We have a decent process to make sure the appropriate topics are set for repositories (we manage all non-forks through Terraform), and to make sure that names include a useful prefix. Though I don't think we'll ever stop debating the right prefixes for our repository names.
It's a "poor man's" ordeal, that's for sure. Organizations are probably the right way to go, if you can.
We're still in the move, so too soon to tell, but I am also wondering if we aren't worried about a non-issue. Because while Bitbucket has "groups", I don't think I have ever consciously used those groups while working in Bitbucket (nor have we ever set up the Bitbucket groups very well for our organization anyway).
In the process of moving from GitLab to GitHub. We just use naming conventions for this: all repositories are called Company.Group.Product, where Group roughly corresponds to the old GL group.