5 ms·

it was interesting to read their reasons for not using github, especially related to no control over bans or sanctions. Microsoft could pull the rug out from un

it was interesting to read their reasons for not using github, especially related to no control over bans or sanctions. Microsoft could pull the rug out from under them at any time if they got pressure from somebody like China.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
simlevesque 6y ago
I'm not sure how GitLab is a better option. China could pressure them too.
- haolez 6y ago
  GitLab is open source and can be self-hosted by Wikimedia.
- detaro 6y ago
  They're selfhosting.
  - simlevesque 6y ago
    Oh I get it now thank you. I had read only the outcome part.
  - addicted 6y ago
    Is this GitLab open source, or is it GitLab enterprise on the free plan? Because they are different products, even if the GitLab marketing pages make it appear as if they are the same.
    - simlevesque 6y ago
      Community Edition.
  - bastardoperator 6y ago
    You can self host GitHub too
    - meesles 6y ago
      Source? I don't think that's true. Github has on-premises enterprise solutions but one should not confuse that with running free and open software on your own machines - https://enterprise.github.com/faq https://enterprise.github.com/faq
      - bastardoperator 6y ago
        I personally don't think anyone would confuse it, but the fact remains, you can host self GitHub. Maybe it costs, maybe it has string attached but ultimately the functionality is there... which makes it true.
    - Cthulhu_ 6y ago
      If you pay the enterprise fee, which is likely an X amount per seat. They MIGHT give it out for free to Wikimedia as a favor / goodwill, but there will be strings attached. (I'm not saying Gitlab doesn't have strings attached)
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - parliament32 6y ago
      It's not open source, at best they ship you a locked down VM image to run yourself. Edit: Confirmed, "GitHub Enterprise is delivered as a virtual appliance that includes all software required to get up and running. The only additional software required is a compatible virtual machine environment." https://enterprise.github.com/faq https://enterprise.github.com/faq
      - saxonww 6y ago
        This is not true, they publish the code at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab. If you want to use premium features, you do have to pay to unlock them, and depending on your deployment you would need to get the gitlab-ee image instead of the gitlab-ce one.
  - bredren 6y ago
    I was able to see Wikipedia uses something called openstack, but not the details of what infrastructure they host on. Anyone know what facilities these repos will ultimately be served from?
    - easton 6y ago
      Wikimedia uses colocated boxes around the world at different providers, and the user facing stuff is backed by Cloudflare. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers
      - bawolff 6y ago
        The user facing stuff is not backed by cloudflare (Cloudflare's magic transit has at some points been used to mitigate DDOS attacks at the IP layer, but otherwise cloudflare is not used. Wikimedia operates (its own) varnish servers in virginia, texas, san francisco, singapore and amsterdam to do frontend caching.)
    - bawolff 6y ago
      Openstack is used for wikimedia cloud, which is a project to give volunteers compute resources to do cool projects (this includes domains wmcloud.org toolserver.org and wmflabs.org). Production does not use openstack. Things like code review tools would be hosted in Virginia [eqiad] (with backup in texas [codfw]) on hardware owned by the Wikimedia Foundation. Docs about how gerrit is hosted https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gerrit https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gerrit if you want to know nitty gritty details see also https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- snnn 6y ago
  Gitlab has no business in China.
tmotwu 6y ago
Interesting to see China be used as the example. Github recently took action towards DMCA requests. Meanwhile, Github has been used as actively used as a safehaven from Chinese censors when it came to 996 protests and COVID information.
- OskarS 6y ago
  For sure, Github should be lauded for its policy towards China, they have absolutely done the right thing here. Even so, there's no guarantee that that would last forever, so it makes sense for a company like Wikimedia to host this themselves.
mxskelly 6y ago
Oh right yeah pressure from China, like what got youtube-dl entirely removed... Oh wait no that was the US government.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- frenchyatwork 6y ago
  It's naive to believe that Microsoft would stand up to the CPP and not the US government.
  - mxskelly 6y ago
    It's more naive to treat the CCP like some kind of horrible boogeyman who wants to destroy freedom while completely ignoring the US's own issues.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - frenchyatwork 6y ago
      > It's more naive to treat the CCP like some kind of horrible boogeyman This is a valid point some of the time, but I don't think it really applies here. First off, the Wikipedia has had problems with censorship by various states, China being the most notable by a long shot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia). It's very much true that the US government (or some other non-China state) could be a threat to the Wikipedia in the future, and I'm sure the folks at Wikimedia are aware of that too.
- driverdan 6y ago
  I downvoted you because it wasn't the government that filed the takedown. Perhaps you mean "a private company using laws enacted by the US government?"

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

simlevesque 6y ago

I'm not sure how GitLab is a better option. China could pressure them too.

haolez 6y ago
GitLab is open source and can be self-hosted by Wikimedia.
detaro 6y ago
They're selfhosting.
- simlevesque 6y ago
  Oh I get it now thank you. I had read only the outcome part.
- addicted 6y ago
  Is this GitLab open source, or is it GitLab enterprise on the free plan? Because they are different products, even if the GitLab marketing pages make it appear as if they are the same.
  - simlevesque 6y ago
    Community Edition.
- bastardoperator 6y ago
  You can self host GitHub too
  - meesles 6y ago
    Source? I don't think that's true. Github has on-premises enterprise solutions but one should not confuse that with running free and open software on your own machines - https://enterprise.github.com/faq https://enterprise.github.com/faq
    - bastardoperator 6y ago
      I personally don't think anyone would confuse it, but the fact remains, you can host self GitHub. Maybe it costs, maybe it has string attached but ultimately the functionality is there... which makes it true.
  - Cthulhu_ 6y ago
    If you pay the enterprise fee, which is likely an X amount per seat. They MIGHT give it out for free to Wikimedia as a favor / goodwill, but there will be strings attached. (I'm not saying Gitlab doesn't have strings attached)
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - parliament32 6y ago
    It's not open source, at best they ship you a locked down VM image to run yourself. Edit: Confirmed, "GitHub Enterprise is delivered as a virtual appliance that includes all software required to get up and running. The only additional software required is a compatible virtual machine environment." https://enterprise.github.com/faq https://enterprise.github.com/faq
    - saxonww 6y ago
      This is not true, they publish the code at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab. If you want to use premium features, you do have to pay to unlock them, and depending on your deployment you would need to get the gitlab-ee image instead of the gitlab-ce one.
- bredren 6y ago
  I was able to see Wikipedia uses something called openstack, but not the details of what infrastructure they host on. Anyone know what facilities these repos will ultimately be served from?
  - easton 6y ago
    Wikimedia uses colocated boxes around the world at different providers, and the user facing stuff is backed by Cloudflare. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers
    - bawolff 6y ago
      The user facing stuff is not backed by cloudflare (Cloudflare's magic transit has at some points been used to mitigate DDOS attacks at the IP layer, but otherwise cloudflare is not used. Wikimedia operates (its own) varnish servers in virginia, texas, san francisco, singapore and amsterdam to do frontend caching.)
  - bawolff 6y ago
    Openstack is used for wikimedia cloud, which is a project to give volunteers compute resources to do cool projects (this includes domains wmcloud.org toolserver.org and wmflabs.org). Production does not use openstack. Things like code review tools would be hosted in Virginia [eqiad] (with backup in texas [codfw]) on hardware owned by the Wikimedia Foundation. Docs about how gerrit is hosted https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gerrit https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gerrit if you want to know nitty gritty details see also https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
snnn 6y ago
Gitlab has no business in China.

tmotwu 6y ago

Interesting to see China be used as the example. Github recently took action towards DMCA requests. Meanwhile, Github has been used as actively used as a safehaven from Chinese censors when it came to 996 protests and COVID information.

OskarS 6y ago
For sure, Github should be lauded for its policy towards China, they have absolutely done the right thing here. Even so, there's no guarantee that that would last forever, so it makes sense for a company like Wikimedia to host this themselves.

mxskelly 6y ago

Oh right yeah pressure from China, like what got youtube-dl entirely removed... Oh wait no that was the US government.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
frenchyatwork 6y ago
It's naive to believe that Microsoft would stand up to the CPP and not the US government.
- mxskelly 6y ago
  It's more naive to treat the CCP like some kind of horrible boogeyman who wants to destroy freedom while completely ignoring the US's own issues.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - frenchyatwork 6y ago
    > It's more naive to treat the CCP like some kind of horrible boogeyman This is a valid point some of the time, but I don't think it really applies here. First off, the Wikipedia has had problems with censorship by various states, China being the most notable by a long shot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia). It's very much true that the US government (or some other non-China state) could be a threat to the Wikipedia in the future, and I'm sure the folks at Wikimedia are aware of that too.
driverdan 6y ago
I downvoted you because it wasn't the government that filed the takedown. Perhaps you mean "a private company using laws enacted by the US government?"