3 ms·
So on a team I manage, we've used github::fi (github enterprise looks to be the next evolution) for the past year. If you don't have an option to put code out o
by RowanH 15y ago
So on a team I manage, we've used github::fi (github enterprise looks to be the next evolution) for the past year. If you don't have an option to put code out onto github.com, then it's great to essentially have github.com inhouse - minus of course all the public repos.
We find it's the developers go-to place, so using the wiki along with where the source is hosted, is fantastic. As a dev team manager, I love the browsing the codebase via the web browser, reviewing what's going on in the code base instead of pulling down code locally.
From a customer, if you've got the funds, and can't go with github.com hosted, then it's the next best thing. It's been rock solid.
- Corrado 15y agoYea, but my point stands that something like Redmine would fulfill your requirements and be open source. It has a wiki that is tied into the Git repo, and a (better) issue tracking system, and browser access to source, etc. I guess I'm just missing why an Enterprise would spend $$$ when they can get everything they need without $$$. Then again, I'm not a bean counter and I guess I just don't understand how budgets work. :/
- RowanH 15y agoA big part of it, is everyone is familiar with github.com, it's exactly the same experience with github::fi. Just business as usual in-house. For development teams that are open source based, pretty much everyone knows github, so the 'feel at home' factor is there. VS getting yet another tool in the mix that you have to get people upto speed on.