• robinm@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Moving to git is nice but I don’t understand why they don’t self-host a gitlab instance.

    • knopwob@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Imho the main argument for github is that it lowers the hurdle for new ane ad-hoc contributions like issues. I’m problably too lazy to registsr a new account for your instance just to open a bug report.

      I’d love a federated git/issue/wiki thing

        • lysdexic@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Github for organizations becomes rather expensive rather quickly (…)

          I’m not sure if that’s relevant. GitHub’s free plan also supports GitHub organizations, and GitHub’s Team plan costs only around $4/(developer*month). You can do the math to check how many developers you’d have to register in a GitHub Team plan to match the operational expense of hiring a person to manage a self-hosted instance from 9-to-5.

    • lysdexic@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      but I don’t understand why they don’t self-host

      Why would anyone self-host a FLOSS project? Trade secrets is not a concern, nor is it barring access to the source code repository. Why would anyone waste their resources managing a service that adds no value beyond a third-party service like GitHub?

      • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Because while you do have control (and “copies”) of the source code repository, that’s not really true for the ecosystem around it - tickets, pull requests, …

        If Microsoft decided to fuck you over you’d have a hard time migrating the “community” around that source code somewhere else.

        Obviously depends on what features you are using, but for example losing all tickets would be problematic for any projects.

        Apparently Mozilla won’t be even accepting PRs there so it doesn’t matter much.

        • lysdexic@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because while you do have control (and “copies”) of the source code repository, that’s not really true for the ecosystem around it - tickets, pull requests, …

          The announcement to drop Mercurial quite clearly states that their workflow won’t change and that GitHub pull requests are not considered a part of their workflow.

          Also, that’s entirely irrelevant to start with. Either you care about software freedom and software quality, or you don’t. If you care about software freedom you care about having free and unrestricted access to FLOSS projects such as Firefox, which GitHub clearly provides. If you care about software quality you’d care about the Firefox team picking the absolute best tools for the job that they themselves picked.

        • lysdexic@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because Microsoft will eat your ass in your sleep

          So Microsoft has access to Firefox’s source code. So what? Isn’t the point of a FLOSS project that your source code should be made available to everyone?

      • SomeRandomWords@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I keep hearing people only on Lemmy bring up Gitea but I haven’t really heard of it otherwise. What’s the appeal and what’s keeping it locked away with the Lemmy community?