3 ms·
I think there's a gap in the market for a much simpler type of git service. All I need is a remote host to which I can push projects for others to see. I don't
by JetSetIlly 5mo ago
I think there's a gap in the market for a much simpler type of git service. All I need is a remote host to which I can push projects for others to see. I don't particularly want pull requests, actions or anything like that.
Maybe a way of facilitating "releases" with compiled binary assets (built locally and uploaded).
Forks can be handled by people cloning the repository and uploading a new project.
- sikozu 5mo agoCan't a lot of this be accomplished by disabling features you don't need? I just checked my Forgejo instance and per repository there are options to disable: Code, Projects, Releases, Packages, Actions, Issues, PRs & Wikis.
- JetSetIlly 5mo agoYes. But I would like a public service that took care of that for me. So like github but without the bells and whistles. Part of the reason for not wanting bells and whistles is for the service to have less chance of dying under a heavy load.
- skydhash 5mo agoPretty much what sourcehut is. In addition you get a public mailing list where people can send issues and patch to.
- JetSetIlly 5mo agoOh interesting! I've heard of sourcehut of course, but never looked at it. Thanks for the pointer.
- tonymet 5mo agohttps://sr.ht/ https://sr.ht/
- Levitating 5mo agoSo we're back to cgit?