6 ms·

I think it is fair to for GitLab to pitch their service, considering that the google code blogspot post specifically mentioned both GitHub 8 times and Bitbucket

I think it is fair to for GitLab to pitch their service, considering that the google code blogspot post specifically mentioned both GitHub 8 times and Bitbucket 3 times, while GitLab offers similar functionality. It would have been fairer for the blog to not-specifically endorse anything or post a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_source_code_software_hosting_facilities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_source_code_soft...

the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
> I think it is fair to for GitLab to pitch their service, considering that the google code blogspot post specifically mentioned both GitHub 8 times and Bitbucket 3 times, while GitLab offers similar functionality. The only thing similar between gitlab and github is that they do something with version control. Gitlab is not a place for open source projects. The projects with the most stars on gitlab s gitlab itself with 221 stars right now. Even the smallest nodejs project achieves that popularity on github. There are many other hosting services like gitlab, what would make gitlab different so that it would deserve a pitch there?
- sytse 12y ago
  Obviously GitHub is much larger, but some projects are moving to GitLab, such as GnuTLS https://twitter.com/GnuTLS/status/573155639683248128 https://twitter.com/GnuTLS/status/573155639683248128 Bitbucket is also mentioned even though they don't have a lot of public projects. GitLab is open source, has a great interface, many features (protected branches, git-annex support) and we offer unlimited (private) repositories on GitLab.com
  - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
    GnuTLS did not move, they were moved because Gitorious got acquired by gitlab.
    - sytse 12y ago
      We did not move anybody. People imported their repo's themselves. Another project that moved is F-droid https://gitlab.com/u/fdroid https://gitlab.com/u/fdroid that was before the acquisition.
      - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
        Gitorious has a header that informs people to migrate to Gitlab.
        sytse 12y ago
        Yes, we certainly strongly suggest it to people. Just wanted to make sure everyone understands that the move is initiated by people themselves, we didn't move anyone.
- some_furry 12y ago
  > Gitlab is not a place for open source projects. What reasons do you have to you believe this statement? I'm curious. > The projects with the most stars on gitlab s gitlab itself with 221 stars right now. Even the smallest nodejs project achieves that popularity on github. Really? I'm surprised. I started coding a forum platform and I only amassed 3 stars. On my non-furry personas, I've capped out at about 13. I don't think popularity in github projects is fairly distributed enough to use that as a refutation of the quality GitLab has to offer. It's a bigger bandwagon, sure, but that's all. While a big bandwagon can be attractive (it is for me), I don't think it's fair to disqualify a competitor based on this metric alone.
  - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
    > What reasons do you have to you believe this statement? I'm curious. Did you use it? Gitlab has barely any open source projects let alone developers on it. Say as much as you want, but for many open source projects community is a big deal. Currently there is absolutely no reason to use Gitlab. Neither does it do things better than Github or Bitbucket in any way, nor does it have a larger community. It's "just" another github clone. > Really? I'm surprised. I started coding a forum platform and I only amassed 3 stars. On my non-furry personas, I've capped out at about 13. The second biggest project on gitlab has 36 stars: https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred The 9th largest already has less than the 13 stars you mentioned on your personal project.
    - some_furry 12y ago
      > Currently there is absolutely no reason to use Gitlab. http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/05/to-get-off-russias-blacklist-github-has-blocked-access-to-pages-that-highlight-suicide/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/05/to-get-off-russias-blacklis... Since you used the words, "absolutely no reason", here's a counterpoint: as part of an anti-censorship hydra effort. All X is Y. At least one X is not Y. ^-- contradiction :)
      - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
- ericfontaine 12y ago
  "There are many other hosting services like gitlab, what would make gitlab different so that it would deserve a pitch there?" Which is why I said the blogpost would be fairer to just post the wikipedia comparison link. I never said that gitlab should "deserve" a pitch on the blog. I did say it was fair for GitLab to pitch their services, as the CEO has done here, but that is different from "deserving" a pitch. It is hard to objectively determine what is the better hosting, but based on people's individual preferences, they can subjectively decide for themselves, which the wikipedia article helps out by clearly explaining the differences. Everyone who uses google code knows about github anyway, but might not be aware that there are other services. We saw gitorious, an entirely-opensource service, fail due to lack of revenue. And we've seen Google Code, an entirely-proprietary solution, fail. For those concerned about the longevity of their hosting setup, they may want a hosting provider that both has a steady source of income to help guarantee longevity and that is based significantly on opensource software (maybe for reasons of philosophical principle in that opensource development should use opensource infrastructure, or for pragmatic reasons such that they can always fork the hosting service code). GitLab fills this niche nicely, in that the community edition is based on fully open-source code, while the enterprise edition (that the their commercial service gitlab.com is based on) uses proprietary extensions. "The projects with the most stars on gitlab s gitlab itself with 221 stars right now. Even the smallest nodejs project achieves that popularity on github." The lack of stars on gitlab projects may simply be due to the first-mover advantage of github, but does not necessarily represent any fundamental deficiencies is the hosting service.
  - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
    > It is hard to objectively determine what is the better hosting, but based on people's individual preferences, they can subjectively decide for themselves, which the wikipedia article helps out by clearly explaining the differences. It's quite easy to tell actually. Responsiveness of the UI, featureset, availability, size of the community. * Gitlab is measurably slower (it takes about 5 seconds to load the commit page of a project, compared to <1 for github) * Gitlab's lacking many features that github has (many filetypes cannot be previewed, lack of integrations, general inferior issue tracker, no search and much more) * Availability: github rarely goes down. Right now it tracks at 100% availability over the last month. * Size of community: there is really no discussion here. Note: I'm not talking about commercial hosting, but about a place for Open Source projects. There is currently absolutely no objective reason to put a project on gitlab.

the_mitsuhiko 12y ago

> I think it is fair to for GitLab to pitch their service, considering that the google code blogspot post specifically mentioned both GitHub 8 times and Bitbucket 3 times, while GitLab offers similar functionality. The only thing similar between gitlab and github is that they do something with version control. Gitlab is not a place for open source projects. The projects with the most stars on gitlab s gitlab itself with 221 stars right now. Even the smallest nodejs project achieves that popularity on github. There are many other hosting services like gitlab, what would make gitlab different so that it would deserve a pitch there?

sytse 12y ago
Obviously GitHub is much larger, but some projects are moving to GitLab, such as GnuTLS https://twitter.com/GnuTLS/status/573155639683248128 https://twitter.com/GnuTLS/status/573155639683248128 Bitbucket is also mentioned even though they don't have a lot of public projects. GitLab is open source, has a great interface, many features (protected branches, git-annex support) and we offer unlimited (private) repositories on GitLab.com
- the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
  GnuTLS did not move, they were moved because Gitorious got acquired by gitlab.
  - sytse 12y ago
    We did not move anybody. People imported their repo's themselves. Another project that moved is F-droid https://gitlab.com/u/fdroid https://gitlab.com/u/fdroid that was before the acquisition.
    - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
      Gitorious has a header that informs people to migrate to Gitlab.
      - sytse 12y ago
        Yes, we certainly strongly suggest it to people. Just wanted to make sure everyone understands that the move is initiated by people themselves, we didn't move anyone.
some_furry 12y ago
> Gitlab is not a place for open source projects. What reasons do you have to you believe this statement? I'm curious. > The projects with the most stars on gitlab s gitlab itself with 221 stars right now. Even the smallest nodejs project achieves that popularity on github. Really? I'm surprised. I started coding a forum platform and I only amassed 3 stars. On my non-furry personas, I've capped out at about 13. I don't think popularity in github projects is fairly distributed enough to use that as a refutation of the quality GitLab has to offer. It's a bigger bandwagon, sure, but that's all. While a big bandwagon can be attractive (it is for me), I don't think it's fair to disqualify a competitor based on this metric alone.
- the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
  > What reasons do you have to you believe this statement? I'm curious. Did you use it? Gitlab has barely any open source projects let alone developers on it. Say as much as you want, but for many open source projects community is a big deal. Currently there is absolutely no reason to use Gitlab. Neither does it do things better than Github or Bitbucket in any way, nor does it have a larger community. It's "just" another github clone. > Really? I'm surprised. I started coding a forum platform and I only amassed 3 stars. On my non-furry personas, I've capped out at about 13. The second biggest project on gitlab has 36 stars: https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred The 9th largest already has less than the 13 stars you mentioned on your personal project.
  - some_furry 12y ago
    > Currently there is absolutely no reason to use Gitlab. http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/05/to-get-off-russias-blacklist-github-has-blocked-access-to-pages-that-highlight-suicide/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/05/to-get-off-russias-blacklis... Since you used the words, "absolutely no reason", here's a counterpoint: as part of an anti-censorship hydra effort. All X is Y. At least one X is not Y. ^-- contradiction :)
    - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
ericfontaine 12y ago
"There are many other hosting services like gitlab, what would make gitlab different so that it would deserve a pitch there?" Which is why I said the blogpost would be fairer to just post the wikipedia comparison link. I never said that gitlab should "deserve" a pitch on the blog. I did say it was fair for GitLab to pitch their services, as the CEO has done here, but that is different from "deserving" a pitch. It is hard to objectively determine what is the better hosting, but based on people's individual preferences, they can subjectively decide for themselves, which the wikipedia article helps out by clearly explaining the differences. Everyone who uses google code knows about github anyway, but might not be aware that there are other services. We saw gitorious, an entirely-opensource service, fail due to lack of revenue. And we've seen Google Code, an entirely-proprietary solution, fail. For those concerned about the longevity of their hosting setup, they may want a hosting provider that both has a steady source of income to help guarantee longevity and that is based significantly on opensource software (maybe for reasons of philosophical principle in that opensource development should use opensource infrastructure, or for pragmatic reasons such that they can always fork the hosting service code). GitLab fills this niche nicely, in that the community edition is based on fully open-source code, while the enterprise edition (that the their commercial service gitlab.com is based on) uses proprietary extensions. "The projects with the most stars on gitlab s gitlab itself with 221 stars right now. Even the smallest nodejs project achieves that popularity on github." The lack of stars on gitlab projects may simply be due to the first-mover advantage of github, but does not necessarily represent any fundamental deficiencies is the hosting service.
- the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
  > It is hard to objectively determine what is the better hosting, but based on people's individual preferences, they can subjectively decide for themselves, which the wikipedia article helps out by clearly explaining the differences. It's quite easy to tell actually. Responsiveness of the UI, featureset, availability, size of the community. * Gitlab is measurably slower (it takes about 5 seconds to load the commit page of a project, compared to <1 for github) * Gitlab's lacking many features that github has (many filetypes cannot be previewed, lack of integrations, general inferior issue tracker, no search and much more) * Availability: github rarely goes down. Right now it tracks at 100% availability over the last month. * Size of community: there is really no discussion here. Note: I'm not talking about commercial hosting, but about a place for Open Source projects. There is currently absolutely no objective reason to put a project on gitlab.