4 ms·

I'm on the other side of the fence. We're just about done migrating from GitHub to GitLab (self-hosted) and it's been refreshing to DGAF about any of the GH out

I'm on the other side of the fence. We're just about done migrating from GitHub to GitLab (self-hosted) and it's been refreshing to DGAF about any of the GH outages I read about.

embedding-shape 6mo ago
Similar boat myself too, finished moving all important stuff from GitHub to self-hosted Forgejo with cross-platform builds. Not only do I avoid all the downtime stuff, but E2E builds also takes ~20% of the completion time it used to take, since now my runners have dedicated hardware hosted at home.
- rmaus 6mo ago
  To maintain a fair comparison, GitHub has supported self-hosted runners for several years (maybe that doesn’t work for your specific usage, for whatever reason).
  - embedding-shape 6mo ago
    > To maintain a fair comparison, GitHub has supported self-hosted runners for several years Yeah, tried that first, as I didn't want to move to Forgejo, I just wanted to keep working when I wanted to work. The GitHub runner on Linux seemed fine, but the ones for macOS and Windows seemingly did something that made them a hell lot slower than even running VMs and then executing stuff inside those. I'm not sure what the runner is doing, if there is some built-in sandboxing or what not for those platforms, but it wasn't feasible to rely on for me as the builds took way too long time.
anilakar 6mo ago
We were on self-hosted Gitlab but after a merger were forced to Github. Navigation feels painful in comparison and basic features such as commit graph are now behind more expensive tiers.
- motbus3 6mo ago
  Interesting! I worked with Gitlab and I also thought it was quite clunky. If it was not for the stability issues GitHub is fine. Any other alternatives to GH or GL?
  - jeena 6mo ago
    We switched from Bit bucket to Gerrit internally and it was a steep learning curve for the des but it's fine. At a customer we're implementing GitHub Actions and even on our Dev environment there are so many hickups with GitHub.
    - Mashimo 6mo ago
      Demo of Gerrit here: https://gerrithub.io/q/status:open+-is:wip https://gerrithub.io/q/status:open+-is:wip
  - Mashimo 6mo ago
    Jira / Bitbucket / Teamcity. Might be pricy though.
    - xp84 6mo ago
      Having used Teamcity for CI I cannot think of a more clunky and hard to use system (compared to GHA, which is what we migrated to).
  - strenholme 6mo ago
    Self-hosting with open source code: - SourceHut: https://sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut/ https://sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut/ - Forgejo (used by Codeberg, etc.): https://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/
    - miroljub 6mo ago
      SourceHut never really clicked for me. It doesn't give me anything useful that I don't already have in a bare git repo through a ssh. Forgejo, on the other hand, is a drop-in replacement for GitHub.

I'm on the other side of the fence. We're just about done migrating from GitHub to GitLab (self-hosted) and it's been refreshing to DGAF about any of the GH outages I read about.

embedding-shape 6mo ago

Similar boat myself too, finished moving all important stuff from GitHub to self-hosted Forgejo with cross-platform builds. Not only do I avoid all the downtime stuff, but E2E builds also takes ~20% of the completion time it used to take, since now my runners have dedicated hardware hosted at home.

rmaus 6mo ago
To maintain a fair comparison, GitHub has supported self-hosted runners for several years (maybe that doesn’t work for your specific usage, for whatever reason).
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  > To maintain a fair comparison, GitHub has supported self-hosted runners for several years Yeah, tried that first, as I didn't want to move to Forgejo, I just wanted to keep working when I wanted to work. The GitHub runner on Linux seemed fine, but the ones for macOS and Windows seemingly did something that made them a hell lot slower than even running VMs and then executing stuff inside those. I'm not sure what the runner is doing, if there is some built-in sandboxing or what not for those platforms, but it wasn't feasible to rely on for me as the builds took way too long time.

anilakar 6mo ago

We were on self-hosted Gitlab but after a merger were forced to Github. Navigation feels painful in comparison and basic features such as commit graph are now behind more expensive tiers.

motbus3 6mo ago
Interesting! I worked with Gitlab and I also thought it was quite clunky. If it was not for the stability issues GitHub is fine. Any other alternatives to GH or GL?
- jeena 6mo ago
  We switched from Bit bucket to Gerrit internally and it was a steep learning curve for the des but it's fine. At a customer we're implementing GitHub Actions and even on our Dev environment there are so many hickups with GitHub.
  - Mashimo 6mo ago
    Demo of Gerrit here: https://gerrithub.io/q/status:open+-is:wip https://gerrithub.io/q/status:open+-is:wip
- Mashimo 6mo ago
  Jira / Bitbucket / Teamcity. Might be pricy though.
  - xp84 6mo ago
    Having used Teamcity for CI I cannot think of a more clunky and hard to use system (compared to GHA, which is what we migrated to).
- strenholme 6mo ago
  Self-hosting with open source code: - SourceHut: https://sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut/ https://sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut/ - Forgejo (used by Codeberg, etc.): https://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/
  - miroljub 6mo ago
    SourceHut never really clicked for me. It doesn't give me anything useful that I don't already have in a bare git repo through a ssh. Forgejo, on the other hand, is a drop-in replacement for GitHub.