this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
270 points (90.9% liked)

Open Source

31365 readers
167 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

First, they restricted code search without logging in so I'm using sourcegraph But now, I cant even view discussions or wiki without logging in.

It was a nice run

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 47 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I moved all my open source projects to Gitlab the day Microsoft announced they were acquiring Github.

(I wish in retrospect I'd taken the time to research and decide on the right host. I likely would have gone to Codeberg instead of Gitlab had I done so. But Gitlab's still better than Github. And I don't really know for sure that Codeberg was even around back when Microsoft acquired Github.)

[–] antrosapien@lemmy.ml 24 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

My first impression of gitlab was offputting because I was using hardened firefox and couldnt get past through cloudflare so I ended up using github. It was also better ui wise but now its just a mess

Edit: slowly i'm starting to move everything to codeberg

[–] grue@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I'm OOTL. Why is Codeberg better than GitLab?

[–] bizdelnick@lemmy.ml 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)
  1. It is FOSS while GitLab EE is not.
  2. It supports a lot of atifact repository formats while GitLab only docker registry.
  3. It is a non-commercial project.
[–] superbirra@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
  1. It supports a lot of atifact repository formats while GitLab only docker registry.

not true https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/packages/package_registry/supported_package_managers.html

that said, I hate gitlab and their commercial choices, they must die

[–] bizdelnick@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago

Thank you I missed when they added this. I only track a very old FR for rpm support and was sure that situation is similar with other repos. However gitea/forgejo supports more formats including rpm.

[–] toastal@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

Codeberg is ran by a German nonprofit. GitLab is publically-traded on NASDAQ.

[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm not really sure it is. I just wish I'd shopped around before jumping to Gitlab, really.

It kindof feels like Gitlab's aims are more commercial and Codeberg's are more in line with the FOSS movement, but that's just a vague sense I have based on things I've seen but no longer remember specifically.

CalcProgrammer1's response to my post seems pretty informative and apropos, though.

[–] linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Codeberg us really new, i think like 2 years. Since covid for sure.

[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Ah. Good to know. I don't feel so bad about going with Gitlab now.

[–] BurnoutDV@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I registered there june 2020 so longer than that

[–] akrot@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

The landscape is changing so fast thanks to LLMs, everything is becoming gated behind logins. Thanks ChatGPT.

[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I still left my old and unmaintained projects on GitHub but I moved all my active projects to GitLab and any new projects go there too. I have them auto mirrored back to GitHub though as the more mirrors the better. I also recently set up a Codeberg mirror for some of my projects, though GitLab's CI is what is keeping me on GitLab even though they nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back. Still hate them for that and if Codeberg gets a solid CI option, leaving GitLab would make me happy. They too have seen quite a lot of enshittification in the years since Microsoft bought GitHub.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back.

Did they just reduce quotas (minutes?, cache storage?) or did they remove features? I've always used self-hosted runner

[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Drastically nerfed the quotas. FOSS projects with a valid license used to have GitLab Premium access to shared runners and now even FOSS projects with a valid license get a rather useless 400 minutes. They also require new accounts to add CC info just to use that paltry sum which means FOSS projects can't rely on CI passing on forks to ensure a merge request passes the checks before merging, as even if you have project specific runners set up forks don't use them and neither to MRs.

I wish companies didn't offer what they can't support from the beginning rather than this embrace, extend, extinguish shit. I guess in GitLab's case there was no extend, it was just embrace FOSS projects and let them set up CI pipelines and get projects depending on the shared CI runners as part of merge request workflow for a few years and then extinguish by yoinking that access away and fucking over everyone's workflow, leaving us scrambling to set up project side runners and ruining checks on MRs.

[–] superbirra@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

They also require new accounts to add CC

just FYI you can still register w/o a cc but the option is hidden, only reachable via 'sign in' and then 'register': https://gitlab.com/users/sign_up

that said they're shit and need to die