Comment by xrd

Wait, forgejo offers a built-in container registry? How does that work? I don't see that in the admin section at all.

"Forgejo is also a registry/store for most package managers"

Do you know if it supports OpenWRT packages?

I guess I'll just chime in that while Gitlab is a very heavy beast, I have self hosted it for over a decade with little to no issues. It's pretty much as simple as installing their Omnibus package repository and doing apt install gitlab-ce.

When I self hosted gitlab I never found the maintenance to be that bad, just change a version in a compose.yml, sometimes having to jump between blessed versions if I've missed a few back to back.

Like others, I've switch to Gitea, but whenever I do visit gitlab I can't help but think the design / UX is so much nicer.

I found gitea's interface to be so unusably bad that i switched to full-fat GitLab.

Gitea refused to do some perfectly sensible action- I think it had something to do with creating a fork of my own repo. Looking online, there's zero technical reason for this, and the explanation given was "this is how GitHub does things". Immediately uninstalled. I'm not here for this level of disrespect.

I find Gerrit to also be very low maintenance.

If you have a high-availability or multi-site set-up you also don't need to take any downtime to upgrade.

The CI job definitions for sourcehut are a pleasure to use: https://man.sr.ht/builds.sr.ht/manifest.md

A really neat feature is that you can also trigger a job by just submitting a yaml file (with the web interface, the API or the cli) without needing to push a commit for each job. This is neat for infrequent tasks, or for testing CI manifests before committing them.

Both are yaml jungles, I hate them equally.

> why would I need a UI besides git and my code editor of choice?

If you ever find yourself wishing for a web UI as well, there's cgit[1]. It's what kernel.org uses[2].

[1]: https://git.zx2c4.com/cgit/ [2]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...

What exactly is the advantage of running something like a restaurant vs what I do at home which is just cook it myself?

-> convenience, collaboration, mobility

CI runners would be the main advantage of GitLab over bare Git, I think. Also if you want to show other people your personal project at some point, it may be nice to be able to link to a diff or a historical version of a file that they can see in a browser. Or just a syntax-highlighted file or a rendered Markdown or Jupyter file. Also previous release tarballs.

Collaboration and specifically collaboration with non git nerds. That's primarily what made GitHub win the VCS wars back in the day. The pull request model appealed to anyone who didn't want to learn crafting and emailing patches.

We at $DAYJOB had an internal git server that was literally what the parent of this comment mentioned (`git init --bare`). It became a little cumbersome, so when I stumbled across forgejo, I was happy to see that importing the existing git repos was a breeze, just had to point the config to look at the existing git storage root and assign groups and permissions via the GUI.

You don’t! Forges are for collaboration outside of the rhythm of git commits. You’re happy to make a new commit every time you have something to add to an issue. With X issues and Y comments a hour, polluting the git timeline with commentary is going to become unhelpful.

Some forges even include(d) instant messaging!

https://secure.phabricator.com/Z1336

This is kind of like asking what the point of Dropbox is when we have rsync. Rsync is nice, but most people won't know how to use it.

I might be one of the few that is intrigued by this being that it’s Java but this looks really neat. Does it do git repositories like gitea, GitHub, etc, or is it more of a project management site for the repositories? They describe it as “code review”, so I wasn’t sure.

I’m a little put off on the google connection but it seems like it could run rather independently.

The deployment may be simple, but at the same time, the Gerrit code review workflow is terrible.

I setup actions yesterday. There are a few tiny rough edges, but it is definitely working for me. I'm using it to build my hugo blog which "sprinklylls" in a Svelte app, so it needs to have nodejs + hugo and a custom orchestrator written in Zig.

What I did:

  * used a custom docker image on my own registry domain with hugo/nodejs and my custom zig app
    * no problems
  * store artifacts 
    * required using a different artifact "uses" v3 instead of v4 (uses: actions/upload-artifact@v3)
    * An example of how there are some subtle differences between GitHub Actions, but IMHO, this is a step forward because GitLab CI YAML is totally different
    * can't browse the artifacts like I can on gitlab, only allows download of the zip. Not a big deal, but nice to verify without littering my Downloads folder.
  * Unable to use "forgejo-runner exec" which I use extensively to test whether a workflow is correct before pushing
    * Strange error: "Error: Open(/home/runner/.cache/actcache/bolt.db): timeout"
    * I think GitLab broke this feature recently as well!
  * Getting the runner to work with podman and as a service was a little tricky (but now works)
    * Mostly because of the way the docker socket is not created by default on podman
    * And the docker_host path is different inside the runner config file.
    * There are two config files, one (JSON) is always stored in .runner and contains the auth information and IP, and the other is YAML and runner needs the -c switch to specify it, and has the config of the runner (docker options, etc). It's a bit strange there are two files IMHO.

We use them in our shop. It's quite straightforward if you're already familiar with Github Actions. The Forgejo runner is tiny and you can build it even on unsupported platforms (https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner) e.g. we've setup our CI to also run on Macs (by https://www.oakhost.net) for App Store related builds. It's really quite a joy :)

Redundancy for read access to the source code is a concern for Dillo. Some years ago, the domain name registration lapsed, and was promptly bought by an impersonator, taking the official repository offline. If it hadn't been for people having clones of the repository, the source code and history would have been lost.

How do people find your online project and know it's you (instead of an impersonator) without relying on an authority, like GitHub accounts or domain names? It is a challenging problem with no good solution. At least now the project is alive again and more resilient than before.

I think it’s a fair concern, e.g. forgejo is a simple directory on disk, with an option to make that into an S3 storage. It really is a no brainer to set that up for as much resilience as necessary with various degrees of “advanced” depending on your thread model and experience. The lack of a FAANG/M in the equation makes it even more palatable.

I found the banning comment to be odd. That said, all it really takes is a policy change (something that I see as far more likely in Microsoft's case) or simply a change in the underlying software (again, somewhat likely with Microsoft) for the platform to become unusable for them. Keep in mind that Dillo is a browser for those who can't on don't want to fit into the reality of the modern web.