4 ms·
Well, they've been using Jira forever. Usually when people say this they are referring to either Gitlab or Gitea. Well, it's not like all of Gitlab is fully op
by batbomb 7y ago
Well, they've been using Jira forever.
Usually when people say this they are referring to either Gitlab or Gitea. Well, it's not like all of Gitlab is fully open source, it's just Open Core, but I'm sure that's a sizable amount of the code, but I would imagine there's a decent chunk of gitlab.com source code that's proprietary (I'm sure somebody will quibble with this in a following comment, but the original argument is an argument of purism of being free and open).
Gitlab CE and Gitea doesn't solve the hosting issue, though of course Apache could probably pay somebody to manage that, but then you've introduced extra overhead for collaboration that most people aren't that inclined to solve.
- dijit 7y ago> Well, it's not like all of Gitlab is fully open source. I think this is not a fair assessment, GitLabs community edition is fully open source and is a full product. The fact you can add proprietary elements for a licensing fee (which are also "open" in that they are readable, debuggable, etc;) is not at all the same as hosting on a platform which is entirely proprietary.
- batbomb 7y agoYou are also not being fair to github then - you can run Github Enterprise Server and it is also "open" in that it's readable (non-obfuscated), debuggable, etc... It's basically a snapshot of what they run at github.com with added features for enterprise (like AD integration). You can't distribute the code. How easy it is to actually do that depends on your ruby skills and your wallet.
- jeena 7y agoI don't think that people are drawn to the specific github implementation (code), it's that they're drawn to github.com the domain where you can't do what you propose.
- linuxftw 7y agoI feel the same. If Gitlab released the community edition as MIT license (not sure what the license is offhand) with no proprietary version, there's nothing stopping some 3rd party from creating proprietary versions/extensions of their own product.
- snazz 7y agoYes. BSD-derived licenses do not stop someone from distributing a proprietary version, while the GPL does (although you can still charge for your version even with the GPL, you just have to distribute your source with the package and make it available under the GPL).
- sbr464 7y agohttps://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce I’m pretty sure it’s MIT. This page says it is.
- brodock 7y agoGitLab Community Edition is being used by major FOSS communities like Debian [1], GNOME [2] and Freedesktop [3]. [1]: https://salsa.debian.org/help https://salsa.debian.org/help [2]: https://gitlab.gnome.org/help https://gitlab.gnome.org/help [3]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/help https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/help While gitlab.com is based on the Enterprise Edition version, it's 100% possible to host into FOSS only if you wish.
- CameronNemo 7y agoI say this as somebody who has used all three of those instances -- it is an inconvenience to create an account for each project you send patches to (or even just file a bug).
- dijit 7y agoDoesn’t oauth help here?
- batbomb 7y ago1. Who is the OAuth provider? 2. What does the registration process look like? OAuth helps with federated authentication. It's not federated registration.
- dijit 7y ago1. Whoever you want, as long as the remote service supports them, github is common. So is the official gitlab.com 2. Click “sign in with provider” log in as normal, or just get logged in if you have a cookie. 3. These are functionally identical, it’s 2 clicks to create an account on gitlab if you use an external identity provider.