2 ms·

Isn't GitLab a self-hosted alternative to GitHub?

copremesis 8y ago
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master (run as rails standalone) https://hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ https://hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ (run as docker image)
mikekchar 8y ago
Yes. But it's not the only one. I think the question you were hoping to have answered is, "Why would you pick this over GitLab?". And potentially the discussion you wanted to invoke was, "Is there an advantage to going with a full free software solution as opposed to a product that is primarily proprietary, but has an open core?" Personally, I think there is, but in the case of GitLab it may not matter. Now that there are some free software heavy hitters (Gnome and Debian) who rely on the open core of GitLab, there is some more assurance that this open core will not become a kind of cripple-ware try-before-you-buy situation. Those groups have enough horse power to maintain the open part of GitLab if they choose to do so. Having said that, I think there is room for other free software entries in this space and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out. In some ways the acquisition of GitHub may be the catalyst necessary to get things started, and I think it's a good thing.
- hawski 8y ago
  In a way AFAIK Gnome and Debian moved to GitLab, because, among other reasons, they did not have enough horse power to maintain their own solution - plethora of services. Of course if the GitLab would fold, they would maintain it, but I'm not sure they would be better off than before in case of work allocation at least.
  - sam_goody 8y ago
    If gitlab were to fold, they would probably move to whoever is the best candidate at the time. While moving is very painful, the fact that git is distributed means that setting up camp somewhere else is pretty smooth. Even the headaches of the other stuff, such as issues et al, will probably be handled by whoever the new host is.

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/tree/master (run as rails standalone) https://hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ https://hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ (run as docker image)

mikekchar 8y ago

Yes. But it's not the only one. I think the question you were hoping to have answered is, "Why would you pick this over GitLab?". And potentially the discussion you wanted to invoke was, "Is there an advantage to going with a full free software solution as opposed to a product that is primarily proprietary, but has an open core?" Personally, I think there is, but in the case of GitLab it may not matter. Now that there are some free software heavy hitters (Gnome and Debian) who rely on the open core of GitLab, there is some more assurance that this open core will not become a kind of cripple-ware try-before-you-buy situation. Those groups have enough horse power to maintain the open part of GitLab if they choose to do so. Having said that, I think there is room for other free software entries in this space and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out. In some ways the acquisition of GitHub may be the catalyst necessary to get things started, and I think it's a good thing.

hawski 8y ago
In a way AFAIK Gnome and Debian moved to GitLab, because, among other reasons, they did not have enough horse power to maintain their own solution - plethora of services. Of course if the GitLab would fold, they would maintain it, but I'm not sure they would be better off than before in case of work allocation at least.
- sam_goody 8y ago
  If gitlab were to fold, they would probably move to whoever is the best candidate at the time. While moving is very painful, the fact that git is distributed means that setting up camp somewhere else is pretty smooth. Even the headaches of the other stuff, such as issues et al, will probably be handled by whoever the new host is.