993
Go Away Microsoft! The Netherlands is Quietly Building Its Own GitHub Replacement (itsfoss.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
89 comments fedilink hide all child comments
πŸ‘ 1
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Yes, that’s true for the git repo itself, but a git forge can provide a multitude of related services, including issues and pull request management, CI/CD pipelines, wikis, static content hosting, package registries, etc. which are not as easily migrated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I honestly think wiki, static hosting, package registries etc. don't belong on a git repo. Github has continuously extended their feature-set, but its caused vendor lock-in which I think is the point. How hard is it to spin up a web service to host static content? There are loads of good open source wiki projects, etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    Why do it yourself in a complicated way and poke holes in my firewall and security if I can use the existing infrastructure that is already a publiclly accessible web page to host just another one? Β―\_(ツ)_/Β―

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Something's are more inherent to git forges imho Like forking, merge requests, secret branches, and team permissions.

    I would prefer those be behind an API and fed into a more flexible UI honestly with the other panels being user defined views to other tools. Like a UI for tekton. A UI for Caddy or hugo or something. A UI for your issues tracker. Etc.

    Even better if it federates those backends...

    Maybe let the site admin have a list of approved views and configs so people aren't putting compromised views on the site.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent