"If you host GitLab yourself, IPv6 is supported as long as your underlying provider can support it. GitLab.com on the other hand does not support IPv6 at the moment due to limited provider support."
It's a nice to have - but not a dealbreaker - for me.
Since I've been using GitHub for years, I am already locked into a platform that's IPv4 only. If I'm moving somewhere new, I'd like to have IPv6 if possible.
To answer your question: no I was not implying that.
All it takes a someone in the billing department leaking metadata to a project manager for confidential information to leak (traffic numbers, storage trends etc.).
Sure trust every employee of your only real competitor if you want, but I wouldn't if it was my business and I had alternatives.
Why should GitLab abandon Azure? Things are working for them just fine. Now when Google acquires GitLab I'm sure that moving to GCP will be a requirements but until then there's no threat to GitLab just because they are running on a platform owned by a Platinum member of the Linux foundation (something Amazon and Google can't say).
That is quite interesting. We are planning to offer IPv6 based kubernetes hosting with transparent reachability by IPv4. Are you interested in talking about that?
The problem with github (indepently of the recent news) is that it is not reachable from IPv6 only networks. And while you might have seen many of them yet, they are getting more and more the standard in data centers, which makes sense, because running dual stack is more effort and error prone.
I think their comparison is wrong. In Gitlab you don't need to pay per user. It's free and the ppu plans are for paid features. Which you still need to pay for per user with the self-hosted solution. So they only provide a managed Gitlab Core installation. I don't see any point of this. Like what am I missing here?
I’m not entirely sure why people are freaking out at this point. This is not the Microsoft of the 90s. How many of these folks are happy to use VSCode and then turn around and panic at this acquisition?
Indeed, nor was LinkedIn, Yammer etc... there is no ‘new’ Microsoft - that’s the same old marketing spin they use every decade to try and make themselves seem ‘hip’ by blaming previous employees rather than changing their ugly business model and lack of ethics.
Well, they have "improved" Linkedin and Skype to the point that usability has gone way down, and resource use way up. It's easy to extrapolate and expect the same with github.
Fortunately we mostly use the repos, not any of the other features, so migrating away will be easy if needed.
Windows 10 has a lot of telemetry that's still difficult to turn off. (Which will be interesting with the GDPR). They've started pushing ads through their OS/platform as well.
Sure MS has gone a ways out into the OSS world, they have docker containers for SQL Server, .NET Core is open source and runs on Linux, etc. They've made some headway, but I can still understand why people have concerns.
There's a huge difference between VSCode and code repository. Switching out of VSCode requires pretty much no effort compared to code repository. Also, I think we'd have seen a similar outrage and panic if it was Google instead of Microsoft.
I actually visited, because we were invited to talk about a partnership in the area of Open Source. While the talk was certainly interesting, I was asking my contact directly, how the situation is internally. And while he is very much into Open Source and trying to push it (within and for Microsoft), he made it very clear that this is only a tiny portion of Microsoft and that the mindset of 90%+ of Microsoft is still the old one, trying to get rid of your competitors.
You are right — this MS will instead mine data the hell out of your repositories and spam you (LinkedIn), and that’s only the best scanerio. Of course, they acquire GitHub to upsale Azure and integrate with LinkedIn. They will have a very complete profile of you, as a developer.
I'd imagine those "freaking out" are at some mid-point, between trusting companies enough to not screw things up, and being so distrusting that they'd never rely on such services in the first place.
You seem to be at the trusting end, which is fine; personally, I'm at the distrusting end, so the reason I'm not freaking is that GitHub (AKA BitKeeper 2.0) could go up in flames and all I'd lose is a free mirror.
PS: I've never used VSCode; I avoid it partly because of its connection to Microsoft, but mostly because I'm very happy in Emacs :)
I use VSCode on Arch Linux and recommend it to others over Atom and such mainly because MS knows how to build dev-tools.
Now, there is always a limit you want a company to get under your skin.
Example where MS F-ed it up are: LinkedIn, Yammer, Skype, Nokia, Code Project, CodePlex, and many more, etc, including they sent their Trojan Horse to take over Yahoo but did not work out because some people actually cared. One of the best projects is going to die. Github. MS is pushing VS/TFS on your throat. Wait and see.
This is in their DNA, they don't know open source, they don't understand it. For that to work they would have to fire 90% of the red-mond ppl and blood sucking consulting companies around them and their top managers would have to start caring about tech not their bonuses and performance numbers at the end of 3 months sprint. They care about their mortgages and that next sports car. THERE is no open source that they understand. Every single piece of open source they built so far that had some success like TypeScript is still geared to pull you back into Windows eco-system, in a very subtle way.
They know Outlook, TFS/Visual Studio, CRM. Done. That is the future for Github. This happened and will happen, that is MS.
And for them to throw this "acquisition" up there to hit the fan is a VERY BAD and SAD move.
Also there is a reason WHY MS became platinum on Linux - they fucked-up windows too and they ran out of options.
> The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request. Either the server is overloaded or there is an error in the application.
Not really an alternative I think. A VM needs management. The good thing about a cloud solution (like Github, Bitbucket) is somebody else is keeping the server up and secure.
Tried both gitlab and bitbucket as alternatives. Bibucket server is a-b-y-s-m-al. We use it at work and the UX is so clunky and backwards and for a solution that is intended for enterprise use, most of the logic in the UI/UX seems to not be directed towards a multi-user environment at all. Bitbucket cloud is more or less the same experience.
Gitlab is known to be unstable and i'll give it to them, the UI improved a bit lately, it's still pretty bad and i wouldn't say it's very much oriented towards multi user collaboration.
I think the main advantage of GitHub is that it was somewhat thought of as an open source hub/portal. Where you have easy access to other projects you wouldn't find without much of a hassle. They would just surface through the help of ratings (github stars).
I agree that bitbucket aka shitbucket like all Atlassian products is a POS, but GitLab is far from unstable? We moved to GitLab (self hosted) and it’s been nothing but incredibly reliable for our 120~ people organisation and we use it heavily for mission critical code control, CI/CD and internal Wikis, if it was even slightly unstable - there’s no way we’d still be using it let alone raving about it.
We doubled down on Gitlab some two years ago, coming at it skeptically with our experiences from the years before that. It's come a long way, it's a great product, but maybe the initial pains are still somewhat in our memories then?
Fair enough, there were a lot of radical UX changes early on but we’ve never had a problem with stability / reliability, by comparison we see a number of Github outages over any given year - to be fair that’s on the hosted product but I would most certainly not want to run Github ‘enterprise’ - it’s a VM image with MySQL and a bunch of other less than desirable technologies.
my bad - was referencing gitlab cloud.
I've maintained a private gitlab instance for my team some 3-4 years ago that was dockerized, it went quite ok, despite docker being rather new at that point.
I don't know how many people actually consider switching, but adding a few private repos to the free github plan will probably make 99% of them reconsider on the spot and even make others switch to github. I doubt MS made the aquisition for the direct profits.
Since their product is "Private Gitlab Hosting", they only seem to provide the hosting. This is not inherently bad, but they make it look like they are much better than Gitlab.
Personally I'd rather give my money to Gitlab so support their development.
this is far from professional... the website has multiple test objects activated, dummy shop items, is poorly optimized, spelling errors all over the place. also this is far away from a github alternative... all you do is start a vm and run the installer script
Hm, I wouldn't migrate my FOSS stuff to ungleich, simply because I don't earn money with it and while I am willing to invest my free time I feel different on throwing money into it. (Company wise I can't make the decision, but I suppose the benefit over our current git-on-NFS + bugzilla + custom distributed, reproducible build system would be negligible, especially given the price for the license).
With that said: What's so much better about ungleich than rolling your own VM somewhere? For a hackathon and as an experiment I recently setup Gitlab on a fresh Arch Linux VM using the Arch gitlab package and setup was very easy. I suppose using the official way of installation makes it even easier.
Do you keep the VM, OS and gitlab up-to-date? Do you do backups?
I think that is a very fair point. If you have the time & fun to setup on your own, there is absolutely nothing speaking against it (many of our employees actually run their own services for fun).
In terms of maintenance: we ensure that the system and installation is up-to-date.
84 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 154 ms ] threadSee: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17226432
"If you host GitLab yourself, IPv6 is supported as long as your underlying provider can support it. GitLab.com on the other hand does not support IPv6 at the moment due to limited provider support."
We will enable it for GitLab.com once we're done with the migration to GCP [0].
Our pricing is per user, tiered. Not per-user and then per feature. Although I understand that's not far off from each other.[1]
[0]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/47216
[1]: https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/
Since I've been using GitHub for years, I am already locked into a platform that's IPv4 only. If I'm moving somewhere new, I'd like to have IPv6 if possible.
We're hosted on GitHub presently though, so I don't have access to the server logs to see if I'm wrong about that. :)
Isn't Netflix running on the same platform (AWS) as Amazon Prime?
Realistic speaking, what's the huge win for GitLab?
All it takes a someone in the billing department leaking metadata to a project manager for confidential information to leak (traffic numbers, storage trends etc.).
Sure trust every employee of your only real competitor if you want, but I wouldn't if it was my business and I had alternatives.
Looking forward to the next shitstorm on Wednesday or Thursday.
Fortunately we mostly use the repos, not any of the other features, so migrating away will be easy if needed.
Windows 10 has a lot of telemetry that's still difficult to turn off. (Which will be interesting with the GDPR). They've started pushing ads through their OS/platform as well.
Sure MS has gone a ways out into the OSS world, they have docker containers for SQL Server, .NET Core is open source and runs on Linux, etc. They've made some headway, but I can still understand why people have concerns.
It's like when Facebook bought Oculus.
Where did you get this idea from? A lot of us used the old, 2.x Skype.
MS may not be dreadful across the board any more, correct, but they absolutely have it in them to wreck a perfectly serviceable product once acquired.
You seem to be at the trusting end, which is fine; personally, I'm at the distrusting end, so the reason I'm not freaking is that GitHub (AKA BitKeeper 2.0) could go up in flames and all I'd lose is a free mirror.
PS: I've never used VSCode; I avoid it partly because of its connection to Microsoft, but mostly because I'm very happy in Emacs :)
Now, there is always a limit you want a company to get under your skin.
Example where MS F-ed it up are: LinkedIn, Yammer, Skype, Nokia, Code Project, CodePlex, and many more, etc, including they sent their Trojan Horse to take over Yahoo but did not work out because some people actually cared. One of the best projects is going to die. Github. MS is pushing VS/TFS on your throat. Wait and see.
This is in their DNA, they don't know open source, they don't understand it. For that to work they would have to fire 90% of the red-mond ppl and blood sucking consulting companies around them and their top managers would have to start caring about tech not their bonuses and performance numbers at the end of 3 months sprint. They care about their mortgages and that next sports car. THERE is no open source that they understand. Every single piece of open source they built so far that had some success like TypeScript is still geared to pull you back into Windows eco-system, in a very subtle way.
They know Outlook, TFS/Visual Studio, CRM. Done. That is the future for Github. This happened and will happen, that is MS.
And for them to throw this "acquisition" up there to hit the fan is a VERY BAD and SAD move.
Also there is a reason WHY MS became platinum on Linux - they fucked-up windows too and they ran out of options.
[1]https://shop.ungleich.ch/de_CH/shop/product/test-nico-14
https://shop.ungleich.ch/shop/product/private-gitlab-hosting...
> Internal Server Error
> The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request. Either the server is overloaded or there is an error in the application.
Interesting then that their Q&A page has been hammered to death by HN. What is this product? What does it do, apart from ipv6? What is the price?
However stuff is all up again now.
Gitlab is known to be unstable and i'll give it to them, the UI improved a bit lately, it's still pretty bad and i wouldn't say it's very much oriented towards multi user collaboration. I think the main advantage of GitHub is that it was somewhat thought of as an open source hub/portal. Where you have easy access to other projects you wouldn't find without much of a hassle. They would just surface through the help of ratings (github stars).
Since their product is "Private Gitlab Hosting", they only seem to provide the hosting. This is not inherently bad, but they make it look like they are much better than Gitlab.
Personally I'd rather give my money to Gitlab so support their development.
https://git.scuttlebot.io/%25n92DiQh7ietE%2BR%2BX%2FI403LQoy...
With that said: What's so much better about ungleich than rolling your own VM somewhere? For a hackathon and as an experiment I recently setup Gitlab on a fresh Arch Linux VM using the Arch gitlab package and setup was very easy. I suppose using the official way of installation makes it even easier. Do you keep the VM, OS and gitlab up-to-date? Do you do backups?
In terms of maintenance: we ensure that the system and installation is up-to-date.
We offer offsite backup as an addon, too.