3 ms·
I use both. Tangled is missing some important features (private repos, protected branches). The ui feels more comfy to me, though. And Codeberg is quite slow fo
by bpev 3mo ago
I use both. Tangled is missing some important features (private repos, protected branches). The ui feels more comfy to me, though. And Codeberg is quite slow for me.
Idk if I can give you toooo much about migration, since I haven't used any CICD kind of stuff; just having repos to push to is super simple if you use their hosted knots. Also not too complicated to host a knot yourself; I'm hosting my own knot, and I like that I own at least one of the servers that I'm pushing code to.
- arikrahman 3mo agoI just switched to Tangled. It was actually very similar experience. I will be using Tangled henceforth!
- nicce 3mo agoTangled is also VC funded, something to consider.
- aruff 3mo agoIt doesn't really matter, you can host your own knot (git backend), spindle (CI/CD worker), and there are already alternative apps to access the same public, consumable records without centralized infra: https://untangled.wisp.place/ https://untangled.wisp.place/
- nicce 2mo agoIt matters a lot. As seen with GitLab and countless other projects.
- aruff 2mo agoI mean, it really just doesn’t here. Every part of the Tangled stack is open source, self-hostable, and interoperable. There are already clients that never hit Tangled infra. If Tangled the company made a decision you didn’t like, you could continue to use the software and keep your social graph, repositories, etc. without them. That’s simply not true with GitLab, it’s a closed ecosystem by instance. Tangled is not that.
- yakmol 2mo agoThe assumption here is that there's lock-in. But there is no lock-in. Architecturally, all of the data is controlled by you and available for any other tool to ingest. This is a crucial difference between ATproto apps and other modern web services.