5 ms·

Github seems to be doing worse

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
rvz 6y ago
Yes. They (GitHub) have been doing a lot worse. Last time I checked, they where completely down 2 days ago. [0] Before that, GitHub Actions was down 14 days ago: [1]. At least with GitLab, you can set up a self-hosted solution for free as a backup, unlike GitHub (Unless you want to pay a lot for GH Enterprise) where some have 'gone all in on GitHub Actions' and then some couldn't push that critical change [2] before the start of the weekend. Oh dear. Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213
- tomxor 6y ago
  > Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. I've been wanting to do this for some time purely for git hosting (don't care about CI at all) but wasn't sure about how to make it failover... Personally i'd be happy with a headless git server, but that's not fair on everyone else who wants the GUI to browse and organise stuff, so I want gitlab etc to deal with that. What would be nice is to have a headless backup server that allowed everyone to continue pulling/pushing from the CLI with their existing repos when gitlab is down. I can't see a smooth way of doing that since it would require messing with the git remotes, unless the solution is inverted and uses a single remote pointing at the "backup" server which then replicates to gitlab, but I don't think gitlab can be configured to change the default remote when people clone it from the UI. I suppose this is why people just end up self hosting gitlab instead.
  - the_duke 6y ago
    If you want transparent failover you need to use your own domain for the repo URL. In case of a failure you (or some automatic job) would have to change the DNS record. Gitlab has a repo mirroring feature [1]. But of course you'd also need to sync users public keys. Downtimes are so infrequent and relatively short that this isn't worth the effort for me. You can instead set up a read-only mirror so people can at least still pull and browse the code.. Gitea [2] might be a better choice than Gitlab, since it's much more lightweight and easier to host. [1] https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/repository/repository_mirroring.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/repository/repositor... [2] https://gitea.io https://gitea.io
    - tomxor 6y ago
      Thanks this is useful to know > Downtimes are so infrequent and relatively short that this isn't worth the effort for me. That's essentially the same conclusion I keep coming too, occasionally it has hit me when I go to push something but rarely has it blocked me or anyone else from continuing to work. > You can instead set up a read-only mirror so people can at least still pull and browse the code Yeah, this I need to do eventually just for peace of mind as a more automated backup solution. At least I don't have to care about failover.
      - mroche 6y ago
        Maybe some kind of pre/post-push hook to automatically push to a secondary repo? Not entirely sure if this is possible, I’ve never written a Git hook before. https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-Git-Hooks https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-Git-Hooks
Bombthecat 6y ago
Well, they are stretching and extending gitlab with more and more functions.. With a... Not so great code base..
- dnsmichi 6y ago
  Hi, what could be improved in GitLab's code base in your opinion? :)
  - YorickPeterse 6y ago
    In the past people have suggested we rewrite GitLab in Scala, Haskell, Node.js, and IIRC also regular Java. I think it mostly comes down to "I didn't write it, so it's bad" :)
    - searchableguy 6y ago
      Suprised no rust or elixir there.
    - Bombthecat 6y ago
      Nah, i don't care which language. Like, at all. I just think that gitlab outgrow ruby.
- joana035 6y ago
  Is there any code base in this world that developers would not complain about? ;)
  - KptMarchewa 6y ago
    The one that will never be deployed on production. Real world unfortunately corrupts beautiful code with it's pesky complications.
  - brodock 6y ago
    The only perfect code is the one you write, all others are crap
wdb 6y ago
Gitlab is completely down until just now, similar happened not that long ago. Over the last three weeks continuously had issues with the Gitlab runners (even not shared ones) were it wouldn't jobs or only after a second or third retry attempt. I think the flakiness of jobs succeeding is also related whether you use their package registry. I can't say I had similar issues with Github.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

rvz 6y ago

Yes. They (GitHub) have been doing a lot worse. Last time I checked, they where completely down 2 days ago. [0] Before that, GitHub Actions was down 14 days ago: [1]. At least with GitLab, you can set up a self-hosted solution for free as a backup, unlike GitHub (Unless you want to pay a lot for GH Enterprise) where some have 'gone all in on GitHub Actions' and then some couldn't push that critical change [2] before the start of the weekend. Oh dear. Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213

tomxor 6y ago
> Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. I've been wanting to do this for some time purely for git hosting (don't care about CI at all) but wasn't sure about how to make it failover... Personally i'd be happy with a headless git server, but that's not fair on everyone else who wants the GUI to browse and organise stuff, so I want gitlab etc to deal with that. What would be nice is to have a headless backup server that allowed everyone to continue pulling/pushing from the CLI with their existing repos when gitlab is down. I can't see a smooth way of doing that since it would require messing with the git remotes, unless the solution is inverted and uses a single remote pointing at the "backup" server which then replicates to gitlab, but I don't think gitlab can be configured to change the default remote when people clone it from the UI. I suppose this is why people just end up self hosting gitlab instead.
- the_duke 6y ago
  If you want transparent failover you need to use your own domain for the repo URL. In case of a failure you (or some automatic job) would have to change the DNS record. Gitlab has a repo mirroring feature [1]. But of course you'd also need to sync users public keys. Downtimes are so infrequent and relatively short that this isn't worth the effort for me. You can instead set up a read-only mirror so people can at least still pull and browse the code.. Gitea [2] might be a better choice than Gitlab, since it's much more lightweight and easier to host. [1] https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/repository/repository_mirroring.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/repository/repositor... [2] https://gitea.io https://gitea.io
  - tomxor 6y ago
    Thanks this is useful to know > Downtimes are so infrequent and relatively short that this isn't worth the effort for me. That's essentially the same conclusion I keep coming too, occasionally it has hit me when I go to push something but rarely has it blocked me or anyone else from continuing to work. > You can instead set up a read-only mirror so people can at least still pull and browse the code Yeah, this I need to do eventually just for peace of mind as a more automated backup solution. At least I don't have to care about failover.
    - mroche 6y ago
      Maybe some kind of pre/post-push hook to automatically push to a secondary repo? Not entirely sure if this is possible, I’ve never written a Git hook before. https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-Git-Hooks https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-Git-Hooks

Bombthecat 6y ago

Well, they are stretching and extending gitlab with more and more functions.. With a... Not so great code base..

dnsmichi 6y ago
Hi, what could be improved in GitLab's code base in your opinion? :)
- YorickPeterse 6y ago
  In the past people have suggested we rewrite GitLab in Scala, Haskell, Node.js, and IIRC also regular Java. I think it mostly comes down to "I didn't write it, so it's bad" :)
  - searchableguy 6y ago
    Suprised no rust or elixir there.
  - Bombthecat 6y ago
    Nah, i don't care which language. Like, at all. I just think that gitlab outgrow ruby.
joana035 6y ago
Is there any code base in this world that developers would not complain about? ;)
- KptMarchewa 6y ago
  The one that will never be deployed on production. Real world unfortunately corrupts beautiful code with it's pesky complications.
- brodock 6y ago
  The only perfect code is the one you write, all others are crap

wdb 6y ago

Gitlab is completely down until just now, similar happened not that long ago. Over the last three weeks continuously had issues with the Gitlab runners (even not shared ones) were it wouldn't jobs or only after a second or third retry attempt. I think the flakiness of jobs succeeding is also related whether you use their package registry. I can't say I had similar issues with Github.