4 ms·

forge "fragmentation" is a good thing. git was meant to be decentralized from the start. re-centralizing on a single provider would just repeat the github saga

forge "fragmentation" is a good thing. git was meant to be decentralized from the start. re-centralizing on a single provider would just repeat the github saga all over again.

ahartmetz 5mo ago
Yeah, it's like lamenting the great food supply fragmentation.
- antonvs 5mo ago
  But Soylent Green is widely available, cheap, and consistent!
selfhoster1312 5mo ago
I upvoted because i agree with the message. Although, it would be much better if we could just have a single identity over those providers, just like we had with mailing lists.
- woodrowbarlow 5mo ago
  i mean, in git (on its own) you can use your email + GPG key across every repo as a universal ID. it's just that forges add an identity layer on top, too.
riedel 5mo ago
it is good if people actually develop good workflows. Actually in applied research/public gov tech we are seeing tons of different gitlab instances. One project we are contributingto the Fraunhofer team developing it has had an internal gitlab with CI/CD and mirrors at three different sites: gitlab.com, opencode.de and code.europa.eu . Now they are slowly trying to move to gitlab.com for the main repo as they cannot open their own repo enough for security/legal reasons. However, the CI/CD stuff still only runs on their gitlab. Now we have our own gitlab instance we, were we are doing some small frontend work as part of a funded project on national level and have a mirror on GitHub for visibility reasons. Now we have another EU funded project that has its CI/CD on another gitlab instance at a partner. All come with their own onboarding and federated IDM quirks. It is a total mess. While git is certainly distributed, the workflow is a mess. You end up cherrypicking CI/CD configs and divergent features all over the place. I wonder: Is there a l'meta-forge' that just would handle rebasing? I actually understand people using bare git workflow with mailing lists. However, even for me the learning curve and necessary attention span/social contracts is too much a challenge.

forge "fragmentation" is a good thing. git was meant to be decentralized from the start. re-centralizing on a single provider would just repeat the github saga all over again.

ahartmetz 5mo ago

Yeah, it's like lamenting the great food supply fragmentation.

antonvs 5mo ago
But Soylent Green is widely available, cheap, and consistent!

selfhoster1312 5mo ago

I upvoted because i agree with the message. Although, it would be much better if we could just have a single identity over those providers, just like we had with mailing lists.

woodrowbarlow 5mo ago
i mean, in git (on its own) you can use your email + GPG key across every repo as a universal ID. it's just that forges add an identity layer on top, too.

riedel 5mo ago

it is good if people actually develop good workflows. Actually in applied research/public gov tech we are seeing tons of different gitlab instances. One project we are contributingto the Fraunhofer team developing it has had an internal gitlab with CI/CD and mirrors at three different sites: gitlab.com, opencode.de and code.europa.eu . Now they are slowly trying to move to gitlab.com for the main repo as they cannot open their own repo enough for security/legal reasons. However, the CI/CD stuff still only runs on their gitlab. Now we have our own gitlab instance we, were we are doing some small frontend work as part of a funded project on national level and have a mirror on GitHub for visibility reasons. Now we have another EU funded project that has its CI/CD on another gitlab instance at a partner. All come with their own onboarding and federated IDM quirks. It is a total mess. While git is certainly distributed, the workflow is a mess. You end up cherrypicking CI/CD configs and divergent features all over the place. I wonder: Is there a l'meta-forge' that just would handle rebasing? I actually understand people using bare git workflow with mailing lists. However, even for me the learning curve and necessary attention span/social contracts is too much a challenge.