6 ms·

Entertainingly the code is hosted on github. :-) I'd have more confidence in it if it could self-host and I was able to see gitea inside of a gitea instance an

Entertainingly the code is hosted on github. :-) I'd have more confidence in it if it could self-host and I was able to see gitea inside of a gitea instance and that was the main workflow. Like this, it feels like maintainers aren't prepared to eat their own dog food just yet. That's fine, but I'll take a pass until that's fixed.

giancarlostoro 8y ago
Well it had to start out somehow. The original project started off on GitHub so it just kinda stayed there. It does cost money to host these type of applications and its easier to have contributions on GitHub since it doesn't require most people to register a new account. It certainly has trade offs for sure.
- majewsky 8y ago
  > It does cost money to host these type of applications I'm hosting Gitea (together with around 10 other services) on a 1/1 instance (1 CPU, 1 GB RAM) at Hetzner. Those can be had for € 2,50 per month. > its easier to have contributions on GitHub since it doesn't require most people to register a new account That's the big issue.
  - weavie 8y ago
    How do you find the performance compared to Github?
    - olavgg 8y ago
      I think that backend is really fast, but I believe that is because when I self host it is on a local server with extremely low latency. The UI is somewhat slower though, code highlightning show up a second after page render.
  - giancarlostoro 8y ago
    > I'm hosting Gitea (together with around 10 other services) on a 1/1 instance (1 CPU, 1 GB RAM) at Hetzner. Those can be had for € 2,50 per month. But can the Gitea devs scale it to support potential growth that costs beyond $10 a month? This is the reality too.
    - merb 8y ago
      we (company 4 people) can use gitlab at 4vCPUs 4 GB Ram (which is slow when browsing repos) vs 1vCPUs 1GB RAM which is still ridicoulus fast.
    - majewsky 8y ago
      Gitea is not going to have hundreds of developers working on it, and users will not visit their project page all too often, so I don't see any scaling issues (besides, maybe, network bandwidth when they put out a new release and everyone comes in to grab the tarball).
  - vetinari 8y ago
    >> its easier to have contributions on GitHub since it doesn't require most people to register a new account > That's the big issue. I don't think so: Github can work as OAuth provider, Gitea supports OAuth integration, so the self-hosted instance can still authenticate people using their Github accounts.
mariusmg 8y ago
>Like this, it feels like maintainers aren't prepared to eat their own dog food just yet. Sorry but that's dumb. Go offer them a decent free server and paid hosting and i'm sure they'll accept your offer.
Freak_NL 8y ago
You could open a well-worded issue for it (“Gitea code base should be hosted on gitea instance”) and track that. There is a chance that the developers will close it as a WONTFIX of course.
- jhasse 8y ago
  That issue alread exists and it's being worked on: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029
- falsedan 8y ago
  > well-worded issue Your example is not well-worded; it's a demand. I'd expect a well-worded issue to share some story about how you were working to achieve some goal, so you tried setting up gitea to self-host the gitea repo, and were surprised that it didn't work (and share the errors etc. that you saw). Then the devss can prioritise your issue by understanding how blocked you are by the missing behaviour, and even propose a workaround or alternative way of achieving your goal.
  - Freak_NL 8y ago
    The phrase between parentheses was meant as an example of the succinct title of such an issue, not the hopefully polite and well-worded body explaining why.
    - falsedan 8y ago
      > the succinct title of such an issue 'Title: do this thing' is not polite or well-worded. "Let's self-host gitea so potential users can easily see how awesome it is" is more polite, far easier to see the benefit of, and a trash-fire of proper composition.
marenkay 8y ago
See https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 - self hosting as almost there.
- Confiks 8y ago
  An insightful comment linked to from that issue: https://lobste.rs/s/gokjbo/gitea_1_1_0_released#c_dg9pwe https://lobste.rs/s/gokjbo/gitea_1_1_0_released#c_dg9pwe
  - alias_neo 8y ago
    This is exactly the right idea. Just like Golang was written in C until ~1.5, you can't develop something "right" if you're relying on it as your tool. Use something that works until you're stable, and have all the features you think it needs in the "core" functionality, then by all means, eat your dogfood.
dspillett 8y ago
IIRC they have an active bug/feature ticket to that effect so they are on the case. The issues holding them back are not core features of source control but the other integrated features that a significantly sized project finds useful: CI support, certain discussion features, and so on. So for small projects I wouldn't let this put you off, and for larger ones or those where for some other reason you want more than just good source control take a judgement based on the features you expect to need. Of course it is git in the back-end, so if you start needing just an interface onto source control but later desire missing features that gitlab/github/other has, migrating the repositories should be almost no effort.
maconic 8y ago
Time for a decentralized blockchain of code commits...
kelnos 8y ago
In addition to what other replies have said, it could also be a matter of time and expertise. Operating a highly-available, backed up service requires time, effort, and skills that could be put to better use writing code.
pbhjpbhj 8y ago
Like if you ran couch-to-10k and only let people on the program who posted certified 10k times ...

giancarlostoro 8y ago

Well it had to start out somehow. The original project started off on GitHub so it just kinda stayed there. It does cost money to host these type of applications and its easier to have contributions on GitHub since it doesn't require most people to register a new account. It certainly has trade offs for sure.

majewsky 8y ago
> It does cost money to host these type of applications I'm hosting Gitea (together with around 10 other services) on a 1/1 instance (1 CPU, 1 GB RAM) at Hetzner. Those can be had for € 2,50 per month. > its easier to have contributions on GitHub since it doesn't require most people to register a new account That's the big issue.
- weavie 8y ago
  How do you find the performance compared to Github?
  - olavgg 8y ago
    I think that backend is really fast, but I believe that is because when I self host it is on a local server with extremely low latency. The UI is somewhat slower though, code highlightning show up a second after page render.
- giancarlostoro 8y ago
  > I'm hosting Gitea (together with around 10 other services) on a 1/1 instance (1 CPU, 1 GB RAM) at Hetzner. Those can be had for € 2,50 per month. But can the Gitea devs scale it to support potential growth that costs beyond $10 a month? This is the reality too.
  - merb 8y ago
    we (company 4 people) can use gitlab at 4vCPUs 4 GB Ram (which is slow when browsing repos) vs 1vCPUs 1GB RAM which is still ridicoulus fast.
  - majewsky 8y ago
    Gitea is not going to have hundreds of developers working on it, and users will not visit their project page all too often, so I don't see any scaling issues (besides, maybe, network bandwidth when they put out a new release and everyone comes in to grab the tarball).
- vetinari 8y ago
  >> its easier to have contributions on GitHub since it doesn't require most people to register a new account > That's the big issue. I don't think so: Github can work as OAuth provider, Gitea supports OAuth integration, so the self-hosted instance can still authenticate people using their Github accounts.

mariusmg 8y ago

>Like this, it feels like maintainers aren't prepared to eat their own dog food just yet. Sorry but that's dumb. Go offer them a decent free server and paid hosting and i'm sure they'll accept your offer.

Freak_NL 8y ago

You could open a well-worded issue for it (“Gitea code base should be hosted on gitea instance”) and track that. There is a chance that the developers will close it as a WONTFIX of course.

jhasse 8y ago
That issue alread exists and it's being worked on: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029
falsedan 8y ago
> well-worded issue Your example is not well-worded; it's a demand. I'd expect a well-worded issue to share some story about how you were working to achieve some goal, so you tried setting up gitea to self-host the gitea repo, and were surprised that it didn't work (and share the errors etc. that you saw). Then the devss can prioritise your issue by understanding how blocked you are by the missing behaviour, and even propose a workaround or alternative way of achieving your goal.
- Freak_NL 8y ago
  The phrase between parentheses was meant as an example of the succinct title of such an issue, not the hopefully polite and well-worded body explaining why.
  - falsedan 8y ago
    > the succinct title of such an issue 'Title: do this thing' is not polite or well-worded. "Let's self-host gitea so potential users can easily see how awesome it is" is more polite, far easier to see the benefit of, and a trash-fire of proper composition.

marenkay 8y ago

See https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 - self hosting as almost there.

Confiks 8y ago
An insightful comment linked to from that issue: https://lobste.rs/s/gokjbo/gitea_1_1_0_released#c_dg9pwe https://lobste.rs/s/gokjbo/gitea_1_1_0_released#c_dg9pwe
- alias_neo 8y ago
  This is exactly the right idea. Just like Golang was written in C until ~1.5, you can't develop something "right" if you're relying on it as your tool. Use something that works until you're stable, and have all the features you think it needs in the "core" functionality, then by all means, eat your dogfood.

dspillett 8y ago

IIRC they have an active bug/feature ticket to that effect so they are on the case. The issues holding them back are not core features of source control but the other integrated features that a significantly sized project finds useful: CI support, certain discussion features, and so on. So for small projects I wouldn't let this put you off, and for larger ones or those where for some other reason you want more than just good source control take a judgement based on the features you expect to need. Of course it is git in the back-end, so if you start needing just an interface onto source control but later desire missing features that gitlab/github/other has, migrating the repositories should be almost no effort.

maconic 8y ago

Time for a decentralized blockchain of code commits...

kelnos 8y ago

In addition to what other replies have said, it could also be a matter of time and expertise. Operating a highly-available, backed up service requires time, effort, and skills that could be put to better use writing code.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago

Like if you ran couch-to-10k and only let people on the program who posted certified 10k times ...