3 ms·

This post bothered me. Perhaps I'm being too nitpicky, and there's nothing inherently wrong with their final choices, but their criticisms of the other systems

This post bothered me. Perhaps I'm being too nitpicky, and there's nothing inherently wrong with their final choices, but their criticisms of the other systems alongside their reasons for choosing what they did are contradictory; overall the article was internally inconsistent. Gitlab was dismissed for the SaaS being only open-core, despite opting for self-hosting in the end. Codeberg was dismissed for having limited CI, but in the end they went for a separate standalone CI anyway (& almost the same platform as Codeberg, just with the added overhead of self-hosting).

philipov 3y ago
Open-core was mentioned, but was not a dealbreaker. Gitlab was dismissed for just following along with what GitHub does and being "AI-powered"
- Tadpole9181 3y ago
  No, the parent is right. The very first two reasons given were being open-field and that they "didn't wasn't to be a sysadmin".
dabedee 3y ago
Yes, they dismissed Gitlab in part because of the self-hosted argument: "I know I can download GitLab and set it up on my own server. However, I’m a software developer, not a sysadmin. I want to spend my time developing software, not putting out fires and paying AWS bills for the rest of time." Yet they ended up choosing a self-hosted option, Gitea, because it was recommended by an acquaintance and they set up a couple lightsail servers on AWS to run it. It's totally fine for the author to share their preferences; they're just exhibiting the internal inconsistencies and irrational behavior we're probably all guilty of at one point or another.
mardifoufs 3y ago
To be honest gitlab can be a very painful beast to maintain if you just want to use it for yourself, especially if it's exposed to the public internet. The update rate is a bit insane, and while the updates are usually easy you still end up having to update almost every week or so, and I think monthly for critical security updates.

philipov 3y ago

Open-core was mentioned, but was not a dealbreaker. Gitlab was dismissed for just following along with what GitHub does and being "AI-powered"

Tadpole9181 3y ago
No, the parent is right. The very first two reasons given were being open-field and that they "didn't wasn't to be a sysadmin".

dabedee 3y ago

Yes, they dismissed Gitlab in part because of the self-hosted argument: "I know I can download GitLab and set it up on my own server. However, I’m a software developer, not a sysadmin. I want to spend my time developing software, not putting out fires and paying AWS bills for the rest of time." Yet they ended up choosing a self-hosted option, Gitea, because it was recommended by an acquaintance and they set up a couple lightsail servers on AWS to run it. It's totally fine for the author to share their preferences; they're just exhibiting the internal inconsistencies and irrational behavior we're probably all guilty of at one point or another.

mardifoufs 3y ago

To be honest gitlab can be a very painful beast to maintain if you just want to use it for yourself, especially if it's exposed to the public internet. The update rate is a bit insane, and while the updates are usually easy you still end up having to update almost every week or so, and I think monthly for critical security updates.