• dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I keep basically all of my shit on Gitlab, so depending on who they sell it to, that might be a goodbye. I’ve really enjoyed the platform, but if it goes into hands of either some clueless business people, data aggregator, or “AI-first” bullshit, i’m migrating to something else.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’ve been casually taking a look at it for a bit, so it’s definitely on the radar

        Edit: Overall i’m happy, at first proper glance, but not having access to even barebones CI is kind of a pain. I can’t really deploy my own at the moment, and having to request access to their own Woodpecker instance is something that seems unlikely to be approved

        • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Codeberg is where I will be next. A nonprofit ownership created because they didn’t like the commercialization of other providers that’s getting more and more popular. Seems like they likely won’t go down this rabbit hole.

    • mark@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      You shouldn’t wait because it’s going to happen. I moved all of my projects off of Github and Gitlab, and now self-hosting my own gitea instance. It’s been great and never looked back!

      • thegreenguy@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        Btw gitea has been involved in some shit, most of the Devs quit and created Forgejo. AFAIK you can seamlessly switch from gitea without needing to completely reset it.

      • Laser@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I actually have an account on there with almost nothing, just my nix configuration, plus a repo I cloned to commit a bug fix on software I used. But it seemed like the most responsible solution as in the price is reasonable, plus I actually like the interface. Codeberg also looks good and claims to be better in some regards, but these are the only choices nowadays.

        Anyhow, I’m still waiting for Pijul to have a final 1.0 release and independent hosting solutions to appear.

    • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Same here. Gitlab CI was a game-changer for me, too. Any thoughts on where else you’d consider going? Aside from GitHub, that is.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I suspect that in the worst case scenario, i’ll be moving stuff to Codeberg and hosting my own CI to support it

    • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s funny because despite all the fearmongering about Microsoft’s Github acquisition it feels like it only improved since then, while Gitlab has done a shitton of questionable and shitty decisions, a ton of critical security issues and in general feels like (at best) they don’t know what they are doing.

      The only thing Gitlab has going for itself is that it’s self-hostable, but they still retain a large amount of control.

      • 56!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        No, it means people can contribute issues and pull requests to projects on other servers. Repositories would only be created on the server your account is on if I’m not mistaken. I believe it uses activitypub internally, so should work the same as Lemmy/mastodon.

  • GrappleHat@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    The chances of a deal are said to be weeks away, if not non-existent.

    What kind of non-sentence is that?

  • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    2 months ago

    I feel like sourcehut really ought to be mentioned more. It federates issue and PRs by email and has a wonderful interface while not having any ads—which is why hosting one’s own repo (and their CI and IRC but nothing else) requires $2 a month, unfortunately.

    • lysdexic@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t think it makes any sense to mention source hut because none of the features you mentioned are killer features (or relevant. Why should I care about implementation details of feature tracking?) and it completely fails to address GitLab’s main value proposition: it’s CICD system.

      Anyone can put up any ticketing system. They are a dime a dozen. Some version control systems even ship with their own. CICD is a whole different ballgame. It’s very hard to put together a CICD system that’s easy to manage and has a great developer experience. Not even GitHub managed to pull that off. GitLab is perhaps the only one who pulled this off. A yams file with a dozen or so lines is all it takes to get a pipeline that builds, tests, and delivers packages, and it’s easy to read and understand what happens. On top of that, it’s trivial to add your own task runners hosted anywhere in the world, in any way you’d like. GitLab basically solved this problem. That’s why people use it.

      • inspxtr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I use gitlab ci mainly and dabble in github actions. Can you clarify how “Not even Github managed to pull that off”? IIRC, actions is quite featureful and it’s open-source, so I assume that can be run with self-hosted runners as well.

        • loutr@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yep, at my previous job I moved a pretty complex build system from Jenkins to github actions. It worked fine and was much simpler to maintain.

          And yes there are ways to run github actions on your own machine, but I haven’t tried it.

        • lysdexic@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Can you clarify how “Not even Github managed to pull that off”?

          GitHub actions has an atrocious user experience, to the point that even a year or so ago people where doubting it was production-ready.

          Sure, you can put together a pipeline. But I challenge anyone to try it out with GitHub actions and then just try to do the same with GitLab or even CircleCI or Travis.

          The fact that people compare GitHub Actions go Jenkins of all things is everything anyone needs to know about it’s user experience.

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Using email for anything is a non-feature for me. I want nothing to do with that outdated, confusing piece of tech that has been shoved in all sorts of places it doesn’t belong

  • aport@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    GitLab still doesn’t even support leaving comments on a commit message. Like, what? GitLab and GitHub have all these fancy shiny features but still suck at offering basic code review functionality.

    I never understood the appeal.

    • allywilson@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean, I get it, but that’s also not a thing of git, right? Just because GitHub does something doesn’t mean every other hosting provider needs to. If your code review process is to comment upon specific commits, maybe it’s the code review process that’s wrong?

      • aport@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        GitHub doesn’t let you comment on the commit message either. The only one I’ve seen do this properly this is Gerrit. And of course regular old mailing list reviews.

        There are so many blogs and posts about writing good commit messages, using Conventional Commits, etc, and the two most popular forges don’t even let you comment in-line on the commit message during a review.

        • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ohhhhh you can’t comment on a specific line of a commit message. I see. I mean… yeah I guess not. That seems like a super niche feature though. How long are your commit messages? I’ve never even tried to do that. Commit messages are short enough you can pretty much just write a normal message not tied to a specific line.

          There are waaaaay bigger issues with Gitlab. Here’s one I ran into recently, you can’t search for pipelines. It’s got a search box and everything but you literally can’t search; only filter. So stupid.

          I actually just went to take a look at Gitlab issues I have commented on to see what my worst ones are. Guess what… you can’t even search for issues you have commented on!!!

          Still, overall it’s the best self-hostable option out there at the moment IMO. I guess Forgejo (truly abysmal name) may overtake it at some point.

  • ulkesh@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Don’t worry everyone! It’ll get bought by some investment firm or by a large company (Microsoft [to shutter it], Google, etc) and everything will be just fine.

    Right?

    sigh

        • I used to host a Gitlab instance at work. It was dog slow so I started digging into it and discovered they had a serious memory leak in some of their “unicorns,” aka Ruby tasks. Instead of fixing the source of the leak they tacked on a “unicorn killer” that periodically killed tasks. The tasks were supposed to be atomic anyway, so this is technically fine (and maybe a good thing in the long run for correctness a la Netflix’s Chaos Monkey) but I found myself kind of disgusted by the solution. I dropped it and went for a much sparser Git repo web server.

          • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            lmao! Man that’s hilarious!

            “We have a memory leak that could lead to a security issue.We should do something about it.”

            “I made a process that periodically kills those tasks. No one will notice the problem now.”

            The unicorn killer will have a memory leak as well. 💀

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            That’s disappointing. They are pretty consistently choosing the wrong thing. I don’t think they know what they’re doing.

            Unicorn killer does sound great for testing. If they wrote tests around anything I’d be surprised, though. LOL.

            If you don’t need all the user management and whatever else it definitely doesn’t make sense to run their junk.

            • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              They do have a ton of tests actually. In their defence, if this task is doing Git things then just killing it when it goes badly is probably the best you can do. Git itself is quite buggy if you stray from the most basic setup. I’ve had it almost completely destroy my .git directory in the past when using submodules.

              On the other hand, Gitlab itself is an enormous entirely untyped Ruby monster, with extremely difficult to follow code. Not in terms of individual functions - except for the lack of types mean you can’t really know what they do, they are quite clear and well written. The issue is the control flow between parts of the system. It’s difficult to know what calls what, so I’m not surprised they occasionally have to give up.

              I had a play with Deno’s Fresh web framework recently (Typescript/TSX but mainly server rendered). IMO it’s light years ahead of other solutions.

              You get full amazing Typescript typing, including in templates (unlike Go for example), but unlike React you don’t have to deal with JavaScript tooling or complex client side state management. It’s a real breath of fresh air. (Ha that wasn’t even intentional.)

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Could be! But that doesn’t excuse a massive security failure like sending password reset emails to attacker-supplied addresses. I am pretty sure they have had other large failures.

        They are writing code with zero/negative regard for security and that makes me want to use any alternative FOSS git host.