14 ms·

Self-Hosting Git

70 points by ibraheemdev 6y ago

edfletcher_t137 6y ago
"Yesterday (2021-03-28) two malicious commits were pushed to the php-src repo 1 from the names of Rasmus Lerdorf and myself. We don't yet know how exactly this happened, but everything points towards a compromise of the git.php.net server (rather than a compromise of an individual git account). While investigation is still underway, we have decided that maintaining our own git infrastructure is an unnecessary security risk, and that we will discontinue the git.php.net server." - https://externals.io/message/113838 https://externals.io/message/113838
desktopninja 6y ago
A worthy self-hostable Git Server too if you'd like to give it a try: https://www.scm-manager.org/
- Legogris 6y ago
  Others with some added functionality like web UI, in increasing line of complexity and features: gitolite gitea, gogs gitlab
  - Conan_Kudo 6y ago
    There's also Pagure[1], which is in-between Gitea/Gogs and GitLab. Unlike most Git forges, Pagure has features that support decentralized development. For example, Pagure supports submitting pull requests with Git repos on any server (regardless of whether it's running Pagure or not) with its remote pull requests feature. Issues and pull request metadata are all stored as git repos using JSON files as data, making it easy and portable to other Pagure instances and easy to convert for any other system. There's development ongoing by one of the other contributors to build an extension for Pagure to support Forgefed[2], a protocol to federate and decentralize code project management. And unlike most Git forges, Pagure is really easy to deploy, update, and modify. Naturally, this means Pagure is packaged in virtually all major distributions[3][4][5][6], too. :) [1]: https://pagure.io/pagure https://pagure.io/pagure [2]: https://forgefed.peers.community/ https://forgefed.peers.community/ [3]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pagure https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pagure [4]: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/pagure https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/pag... [5]: https://packages.debian.org/sid/pagure https://packages.debian.org/sid/pagure [6]: https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/pagure https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/pagure
    - Legogris 6y ago
      That looks really compelling, especially the decentralized collaboration functionality you mentioned. Haven't seen before, will check it out :)
  - iKevinShah 6y ago
    I was using self hosted gitlab (plus runner) . It did the job perfectly well but was too resource heavy. Moved to Gitea and haven't looked back. Although extensibility / plugins are not there yet, but still for "git" it works wonders.
  - nattaylor 6y ago
    Plain ol' gitweb ain't bad either https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb
  - stevekemp 6y ago
    Add gitbucket to your list too, it's a single .war file which makes deployment trivial, and it has a simple CI-system built in.
- arichard123 6y ago
  And if you need less than that you can do a lot just with SSH and file system permissions for read only deploy keys. I wrote a script that uses a directory structure with sym-linked ssh keys as a config for a to add/edit/remove ssh access. It appeals to me because I had gitlab for our 2 person team and it was just wrong sized for us. So many features went unused. Frequent upgrades meant an increasingly powerful server was required for doing basically nothing most of the time. CI/CD is not something we need.
  - andrewzah 6y ago
    I find that gitlab is generally overkill. Gitea [0] is quite simple to deploy and uses much less resources. If you do want CI/CD later, you can integrate a self-hosted Drone [1] instance. [0]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea [1]: https://github.com/drone/drone https://github.com/drone/drone
  - OldHand2018 6y ago
    If you've got a small team such that managing SSH keys is reasonable, you can just keep using git over SSH and add CI/CD via githooks. It's honestly very, very easy - put an appropriately-named shell script in the directory and git automatically executes it. Just make a script called post-receive that kicks off your process when a push has been made. The script will receive all the information it needs to know what branch/ref changed. https://git-scm.com/docs/githooks https://git-scm.com/docs/githooks
sigmonsays 6y ago
What is meant by "big corporates turning open-source into a T-shirt farming service" ? Is the main point being made that, corporations are using open source (ie github) as a platform to commercialize software?
- Grumbledour 6y ago
  It probably refers to the controversy surrounding hacktoberfest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24643894 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24643894
  - sofixa 6y ago
    Which has nothing to do with GitHub, certainly isn't about the t-shirts, and had one bad year due to specific popularity among a non-technical crowd.
8fingerlouie 6y ago
While i recently gave up self-hosting anything because i felt it was too time consuming, and instead i rely on public services like bitbucket for git hosting, i still have a Gitea instance running in docker on a host that is setup to mirror all my Bitbucket repositories. While probably not really needed as Git repositories are self contained, i find it nice to have a "backup" on hand.
lvass 6y ago
Git web interfaces should be Bring Your Own, really. I never bother using those as I can have a consistent interface inside emacs. Why should the repository owner choose which interface you view it on?
- jedimastert 6y ago
  I really don't want to have to pull an entire repo to check something out. I read open source code waaaaaaaaaaay more than I have any need to actually run it or do anything to it locally.
  - 1f60c 6y ago
    Shallow clones are really useful for that: git clone —-depth 1 …
  - lvass 6y ago
    Partial/shallow clone is a git feature.
- djcollier 6y ago
  Because most self-hosted Git services like Gogs and Gitea include features not part of git, such as pull requests, releases, and issues, which require some kind of database.
  - lvass 6y ago
    That's an entirely different concern. If people would not shove their repository alongside those features, instead of relaying those through a standalone and documented manner, I would probably also be easily tracking those features inside my editor.
funkaster 6y ago
Interesting! recently I started self-hosting my personal repos using gogs (https://gogs.io/ https://gogs.io/) it’s really lightweight, and I can evn run it in an arm64 box (the same one I use for my NAS). If you’re looking for a more complete yet still lightweight alternative, give gogs a look.
- tgragnato 6y ago
  Does it have a single user mode?
  - scaladev 6y ago
    You can disable registration (and authentication through third-party providers) if that's what you mean. Personally I'd rather use gitea though. It has a more healthy development community (as in more than one developer) and is gaining new functionality at decent pace.
    - tgragnato 6y ago
      I mean if a single user is integrated in URI paths handling and in the webUI. Like, can I get domain/repo.git somehow with no user management at all?
  - HelloNurse 6y ago
    If you don't give out credentials Git itself and/or a repository browsing web interface are single user. Did you mean something else?
- lifty 6y ago
  Also worth checking Gitea (https://gitea.io/en-us/ https://gitea.io/en-us/) which is a popular fork of Gogs.
  - sdesol 6y ago
    Some background for those that may be not know which one to choose. Gitea forked a while back due to the belief that the maintainer of Gogs was not moving fast enough. I can't speak for the quality, but the difference in activity level is extremely evident as the following shows: Gogs https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=github%3Agogs%2Fgogs&v=repo https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=gith... Gitea https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=github%3Ago-gitea%2Fgitea&v=repo https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=gith...
philshem 6y ago
Probably a naive question, but is a git server required? Could one imagine a git repository stored as static files (e.g. in a cloud bucket), and the client then runs git the functionality. Or, a "serverless" git, with cloud functions? (I guess concurrent writing would be an issue.) EDIT: I don't mean ssh'ing to a server with git installed on it. I was thinking of a git-based protocol but based on static files. But thanks for the tips.
- rovr138 6y ago
  The most naive git server is a place you can ssh into that has git installed and disk space. You can set it as a remote. A git server is not required. You can just run it locally or even use another folder as a remote.
  - pekim 6y ago
    This is what I do, on a $5/month digitalocean VPS. It's about as simple as it gets, and is sufficient for my needs.
- leephillips 6y ago
  All you need is a web server, if you accept patches by email.
- q3k 6y ago
  That's how Git already works, eg. over SSH or even HTTP. Simple git server over SSH: local> ssh example.com example.com> git init --bare code example.com> exit local> git clone example.com:code Nothing required on the remote side other than an SSH server. Works with multiple users, too - just use SSH auth.
- DoingIsLearning 6y ago
  you can read up on the --bare option but you can point git to a remote location such as a network drive or even a local folder (I don't recommend this of course) but my point is there is no hard restriction within git as to where it is hosted. A long time ago when I was working in a company that still prescribed SVN, I used a backed up network drive location as the location for my git bare repos, I just used it to manage prototypes or feasibility work nothing serious but it was more familiar and productivity for me than the accepted SVN workflow.
nicky0 6y ago
It's not really self hosting git. It's self hosting a web interface to git. I swear 90% of people who use git don't know you can just push/pull directly from another computer's git repos.
- lvass 6y ago
  I prefer to think they do and simply omitted "web interface" from the title. Edit: Was a response to edited-out "Do people not know you can self host git using ... git?"
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
TotempaaltJ 6y ago
Does anyone have any thoughts on self-hosting https://sourcehut.org/ https://sourcehut.org/? It seems like a very interesting option to me
- Shadonototro 6y ago
  they focus on minimalism and they lost in readability and usability
  - naringas 6y ago
    there's an aspect of readability that is in the eye of the reader. I've been thinking about this a lot. often I hear (specially old-guard) hackers talking about easy and simplicity but they really mean it's familiar to them.
- kodah 6y ago
  I wouldn't. The last time I tried to use their software I asked if anyone had any insights with how to use it in Docker (much of it is written in Python) and the response I got was cringe worthy. I'm just some person on the internet so take that for what you will.
  - whycombagator 6y ago
    > the response I got was cringe worthy How so?
    - nerdponx 6y ago
      I assume they were belittled for saying the D word.
  - chousuke 6y ago
    All of the sr.ht software is packaged for Alpine, so you can just install and configure them in your Docker container, the same way you would install and configure them in a VM. There's no push-button magic for it, presumably because SourceHut the company (ie. Drew) isn't interested in running it in containers, but nothing is stopping you from trying. It's different from most Python software in that you're expected to use your OS's package manager and standard service tooling.
rvz 6y ago
As someone who had countlessly saying [0] this to at least to either setup a self-hosted Git repository or use that as a backup almost a year ago since GitHub made teams free [1] I do welcome anyone moving from GitHub to a self hosted solution. There are are several open-source software projects that have been doing the same thing but on a self-hosted solution. GitLab instance like (GNOME, GTK, etc) or cgit (wireguard, Linux, etc) and so on. ReactOS has a backup mirror of this in case GitHub goes down. [2] We really need to get away from the idea of 'centralising everything'. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26469749 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26469749 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 [2] https://github.com/reactos/reactos#code-mirrors https://github.com/reactos/reactos#code-mirrors
- temac 6y ago
  Linux has even used Github once as a backup solution for hosting the main repo, during a very short period of time. The workflows git has been developed for in the first place has little to do with the non-git and mostly walled garden feature provided by hosted Saas, being Github or even Gitlab.com Of course some projects find it convenient, but I'm not impressed by the embrace/extend approaches, esp when it shapes the technical practices because of workflow limitations existing for mere business needs: if a merge request is not possible from and to any host, that's really a big loss - and that's particularly important because of geostrategic restrictions (mainly in practice for now: the US "randomly" banning other countries, or the reverse: countries "randomly" banning various, mainly US, services)
  - southerntofu 6y ago
    I explored these questions in a blogpost, if that can be of interest to you: https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/ https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/
XorNot 6y ago
Recently I just finished tearing down all my self-host services. Things facing the public internet might be convenient, but heck if I want to face that security nightmare in an ongoing way. All my git repos now live in a "git" folder I share amongst my fileserver and other machines with syncthing, hosting only the bare repos. If I need pull requests or issue tracking, it's got to be something that goes with the repository - as it always should've been, really.
- edfletcher_t137 6y ago
  This, 1000%. There's good reason infrastructure-as-a-service has become so popular: self-hosting _sucks_. Not only is there the constant and every-growing security nightmare for which companies like GitHub have entire world-class teams, but let's not forget the fact that self-hosting means you're a sysadmin again. Which _sucks_. The interesting write-up would be the one describing what the experience has been like 6-, 12-, 18-months down the road. It's easy to be optimistic and idealistic at the outset, much more difficult to remain so in the face of the day-to-day realities.
- sdoering 6y ago
  (nearly) all my projects live in an account on uberspace.com. This is a German shared hosting provider with quite great offerings. You get a shell (ok, no root/sudo because shared hosting) with 10GB space, databases and what not. A vibrant community providing installation resources for a massive amount of tooling: https://lab.uberspace.de/ https://lab.uberspace.de/ I am in no way affiliated to them just a happy customer for 10+ years now. btw: it is pay what you like, but min 1€ per month.
  - theamk 6y ago
    Installation is the easy part. The hard part is remembering to update all of your software, and making sure you do it fast enough in case there is a zero-day. The worst part is discovering that you installed a simple app and forgot about it; and now hackers got in, encrypted your files and database, and now want a ransom.
second--shift 6y ago
I've been self-hosting https://gitea.io/en-us/ https://gitea.io/en-us/ with no issues. One-liner to spin it up in Docker; exposed on the LAN only and easily accessible from anywhere with an SSH tunnel thru my bastion. Trouble-free workflow and I feel safe knowing my source code doesn't live on a computer somewhere in someone else's closet[1] [1] - https://xkcd.com/908/ https://xkcd.com/908/
pokstad 6y ago
Just use rsync.net. All you really need is a secure SSH accessible system with the git suite. Publishing a website is not necessary since you can browse code locally through git-web.

70 points by ibraheemdev 6y ago

"Yesterday (2021-03-28) two malicious commits were pushed to the php-src repo 1 from the names of Rasmus Lerdorf and myself. We don't yet know how exactly this happened, but everything points towards a compromise of the git.php.net server (rather than a compromise of an individual git account). While investigation is still underway, we have decided that maintaining our own git infrastructure is an unnecessary security risk, and that we will discontinue the git.php.net server." - https://externals.io/message/113838 https://externals.io/message/113838

desktopninja 6y ago

A worthy self-hostable Git Server too if you'd like to give it a try: https://www.scm-manager.org/

Legogris 6y ago
Others with some added functionality like web UI, in increasing line of complexity and features: gitolite gitea, gogs gitlab
- Conan_Kudo 6y ago
  There's also Pagure[1], which is in-between Gitea/Gogs and GitLab. Unlike most Git forges, Pagure has features that support decentralized development. For example, Pagure supports submitting pull requests with Git repos on any server (regardless of whether it's running Pagure or not) with its remote pull requests feature. Issues and pull request metadata are all stored as git repos using JSON files as data, making it easy and portable to other Pagure instances and easy to convert for any other system. There's development ongoing by one of the other contributors to build an extension for Pagure to support Forgefed[2], a protocol to federate and decentralize code project management. And unlike most Git forges, Pagure is really easy to deploy, update, and modify. Naturally, this means Pagure is packaged in virtually all major distributions[3][4][5][6], too. :) [1]: https://pagure.io/pagure https://pagure.io/pagure [2]: https://forgefed.peers.community/ https://forgefed.peers.community/ [3]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pagure https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pagure [4]: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/pagure https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/pag... [5]: https://packages.debian.org/sid/pagure https://packages.debian.org/sid/pagure [6]: https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/pagure https://packages.ubuntu.com/focal/pagure
  - Legogris 6y ago
    That looks really compelling, especially the decentralized collaboration functionality you mentioned. Haven't seen before, will check it out :)
- iKevinShah 6y ago
  I was using self hosted gitlab (plus runner) . It did the job perfectly well but was too resource heavy. Moved to Gitea and haven't looked back. Although extensibility / plugins are not there yet, but still for "git" it works wonders.
- nattaylor 6y ago
  Plain ol' gitweb ain't bad either https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb
- stevekemp 6y ago
  Add gitbucket to your list too, it's a single .war file which makes deployment trivial, and it has a simple CI-system built in.
arichard123 6y ago
And if you need less than that you can do a lot just with SSH and file system permissions for read only deploy keys. I wrote a script that uses a directory structure with sym-linked ssh keys as a config for a to add/edit/remove ssh access. It appeals to me because I had gitlab for our 2 person team and it was just wrong sized for us. So many features went unused. Frequent upgrades meant an increasingly powerful server was required for doing basically nothing most of the time. CI/CD is not something we need.
- andrewzah 6y ago
  I find that gitlab is generally overkill. Gitea [0] is quite simple to deploy and uses much less resources. If you do want CI/CD later, you can integrate a self-hosted Drone [1] instance. [0]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea [1]: https://github.com/drone/drone https://github.com/drone/drone
- OldHand2018 6y ago
  If you've got a small team such that managing SSH keys is reasonable, you can just keep using git over SSH and add CI/CD via githooks. It's honestly very, very easy - put an appropriately-named shell script in the directory and git automatically executes it. Just make a script called post-receive that kicks off your process when a push has been made. The script will receive all the information it needs to know what branch/ref changed. https://git-scm.com/docs/githooks https://git-scm.com/docs/githooks

sigmonsays 6y ago

What is meant by "big corporates turning open-source into a T-shirt farming service" ? Is the main point being made that, corporations are using open source (ie github) as a platform to commercialize software?

Grumbledour 6y ago
It probably refers to the controversy surrounding hacktoberfest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24643894 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24643894
- sofixa 6y ago
  Which has nothing to do with GitHub, certainly isn't about the t-shirts, and had one bad year due to specific popularity among a non-technical crowd.

8fingerlouie 6y ago

While i recently gave up self-hosting anything because i felt it was too time consuming, and instead i rely on public services like bitbucket for git hosting, i still have a Gitea instance running in docker on a host that is setup to mirror all my Bitbucket repositories. While probably not really needed as Git repositories are self contained, i find it nice to have a "backup" on hand.

lvass 6y ago

Git web interfaces should be Bring Your Own, really. I never bother using those as I can have a consistent interface inside emacs. Why should the repository owner choose which interface you view it on?

jedimastert 6y ago
I really don't want to have to pull an entire repo to check something out. I read open source code waaaaaaaaaaay more than I have any need to actually run it or do anything to it locally.
- 1f60c 6y ago
  Shallow clones are really useful for that: git clone —-depth 1 …
- lvass 6y ago
  Partial/shallow clone is a git feature.
djcollier 6y ago
Because most self-hosted Git services like Gogs and Gitea include features not part of git, such as pull requests, releases, and issues, which require some kind of database.
- lvass 6y ago
  That's an entirely different concern. If people would not shove their repository alongside those features, instead of relaying those through a standalone and documented manner, I would probably also be easily tracking those features inside my editor.

funkaster 6y ago

Interesting! recently I started self-hosting my personal repos using gogs (https://gogs.io/ https://gogs.io/) it’s really lightweight, and I can evn run it in an arm64 box (the same one I use for my NAS). If you’re looking for a more complete yet still lightweight alternative, give gogs a look.

tgragnato 6y ago
Does it have a single user mode?
- scaladev 6y ago
  You can disable registration (and authentication through third-party providers) if that's what you mean. Personally I'd rather use gitea though. It has a more healthy development community (as in more than one developer) and is gaining new functionality at decent pace.
  - tgragnato 6y ago
    I mean if a single user is integrated in URI paths handling and in the webUI. Like, can I get domain/repo.git somehow with no user management at all?
- HelloNurse 6y ago
  If you don't give out credentials Git itself and/or a repository browsing web interface are single user. Did you mean something else?
lifty 6y ago
Also worth checking Gitea (https://gitea.io/en-us/ https://gitea.io/en-us/) which is a popular fork of Gogs.
- sdesol 6y ago
  Some background for those that may be not know which one to choose. Gitea forked a while back due to the belief that the maintainer of Gogs was not moving fast enough. I can't speak for the quality, but the difference in activity level is extremely evident as the following shows: Gogs https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=github%3Agogs%2Fgogs&v=repo https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=gith... Gitea https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=github%3Ago-gitea%2Fgitea&v=repo https://public-001.gitsense.com/insights/github/repos?r=gith...

philshem 6y ago

Probably a naive question, but is a git server required? Could one imagine a git repository stored as static files (e.g. in a cloud bucket), and the client then runs git the functionality. Or, a "serverless" git, with cloud functions? (I guess concurrent writing would be an issue.) EDIT: I don't mean ssh'ing to a server with git installed on it. I was thinking of a git-based protocol but based on static files. But thanks for the tips.

rovr138 6y ago
The most naive git server is a place you can ssh into that has git installed and disk space. You can set it as a remote. A git server is not required. You can just run it locally or even use another folder as a remote.
- pekim 6y ago
  This is what I do, on a $5/month digitalocean VPS. It's about as simple as it gets, and is sufficient for my needs.
leephillips 6y ago
All you need is a web server, if you accept patches by email.
q3k 6y ago
That's how Git already works, eg. over SSH or even HTTP. Simple git server over SSH: local> ssh example.com example.com> git init --bare code example.com> exit local> git clone example.com:code Nothing required on the remote side other than an SSH server. Works with multiple users, too - just use SSH auth.
DoingIsLearning 6y ago
you can read up on the --bare option but you can point git to a remote location such as a network drive or even a local folder (I don't recommend this of course) but my point is there is no hard restriction within git as to where it is hosted. A long time ago when I was working in a company that still prescribed SVN, I used a backed up network drive location as the location for my git bare repos, I just used it to manage prototypes or feasibility work nothing serious but it was more familiar and productivity for me than the accepted SVN workflow.

nicky0 6y ago

It's not really self hosting git. It's self hosting a web interface to git. I swear 90% of people who use git don't know you can just push/pull directly from another computer's git repos.

lvass 6y ago
I prefer to think they do and simply omitted "web interface" from the title. Edit: Was a response to edited-out "Do people not know you can self host git using ... git?"
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

TotempaaltJ 6y ago

Does anyone have any thoughts on self-hosting https://sourcehut.org/ https://sourcehut.org/? It seems like a very interesting option to me

Shadonototro 6y ago
they focus on minimalism and they lost in readability and usability
- naringas 6y ago
  there's an aspect of readability that is in the eye of the reader. I've been thinking about this a lot. often I hear (specially old-guard) hackers talking about easy and simplicity but they really mean it's familiar to them.
kodah 6y ago
I wouldn't. The last time I tried to use their software I asked if anyone had any insights with how to use it in Docker (much of it is written in Python) and the response I got was cringe worthy. I'm just some person on the internet so take that for what you will.
- whycombagator 6y ago
  > the response I got was cringe worthy How so?
  - nerdponx 6y ago
    I assume they were belittled for saying the D word.
- chousuke 6y ago
  All of the sr.ht software is packaged for Alpine, so you can just install and configure them in your Docker container, the same way you would install and configure them in a VM. There's no push-button magic for it, presumably because SourceHut the company (ie. Drew) isn't interested in running it in containers, but nothing is stopping you from trying. It's different from most Python software in that you're expected to use your OS's package manager and standard service tooling.

rvz 6y ago

As someone who had countlessly saying [0] this to at least to either setup a self-hosted Git repository or use that as a backup almost a year ago since GitHub made teams free [1] I do welcome anyone moving from GitHub to a self hosted solution. There are are several open-source software projects that have been doing the same thing but on a self-hosted solution. GitLab instance like (GNOME, GTK, etc) or cgit (wireguard, Linux, etc) and so on. ReactOS has a backup mirror of this in case GitHub goes down. [2] We really need to get away from the idea of 'centralising everything'. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26469749 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26469749 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 [2] https://github.com/reactos/reactos#code-mirrors https://github.com/reactos/reactos#code-mirrors

temac 6y ago
Linux has even used Github once as a backup solution for hosting the main repo, during a very short period of time. The workflows git has been developed for in the first place has little to do with the non-git and mostly walled garden feature provided by hosted Saas, being Github or even Gitlab.com Of course some projects find it convenient, but I'm not impressed by the embrace/extend approaches, esp when it shapes the technical practices because of workflow limitations existing for mere business needs: if a merge request is not possible from and to any host, that's really a big loss - and that's particularly important because of geostrategic restrictions (mainly in practice for now: the US "randomly" banning other countries, or the reverse: countries "randomly" banning various, mainly US, services)
- southerntofu 6y ago
  I explored these questions in a blogpost, if that can be of interest to you: https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/ https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/

XorNot 6y ago

Recently I just finished tearing down all my self-host services. Things facing the public internet might be convenient, but heck if I want to face that security nightmare in an ongoing way. All my git repos now live in a "git" folder I share amongst my fileserver and other machines with syncthing, hosting only the bare repos. If I need pull requests or issue tracking, it's got to be something that goes with the repository - as it always should've been, really.

edfletcher_t137 6y ago
This, 1000%. There's good reason infrastructure-as-a-service has become so popular: self-hosting _sucks_. Not only is there the constant and every-growing security nightmare for which companies like GitHub have entire world-class teams, but let's not forget the fact that self-hosting means you're a sysadmin again. Which _sucks_. The interesting write-up would be the one describing what the experience has been like 6-, 12-, 18-months down the road. It's easy to be optimistic and idealistic at the outset, much more difficult to remain so in the face of the day-to-day realities.
sdoering 6y ago
(nearly) all my projects live in an account on uberspace.com. This is a German shared hosting provider with quite great offerings. You get a shell (ok, no root/sudo because shared hosting) with 10GB space, databases and what not. A vibrant community providing installation resources for a massive amount of tooling: https://lab.uberspace.de/ https://lab.uberspace.de/ I am in no way affiliated to them just a happy customer for 10+ years now. btw: it is pay what you like, but min 1€ per month.
- theamk 6y ago
  Installation is the easy part. The hard part is remembering to update all of your software, and making sure you do it fast enough in case there is a zero-day. The worst part is discovering that you installed a simple app and forgot about it; and now hackers got in, encrypted your files and database, and now want a ransom.

second--shift 6y ago

I've been self-hosting https://gitea.io/en-us/ https://gitea.io/en-us/ with no issues. One-liner to spin it up in Docker; exposed on the LAN only and easily accessible from anywhere with an SSH tunnel thru my bastion. Trouble-free workflow and I feel safe knowing my source code doesn't live on a computer somewhere in someone else's closet[1] [1] - https://xkcd.com/908/ https://xkcd.com/908/

pokstad 6y ago

Just use rsync.net. All you really need is a secure SSH accessible system with the git suite. Publishing a website is not necessary since you can browse code locally through git-web.