| ▲ | pimpl 8 hours ago |
| What are good alternatives to GitHub for private repos + actions? I'm considering moving my company off of it because of reliablity issues. |
|
| ▲ | mfenniak 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| It probably depends on your scale, but I'd suggest self-hosting a Forgejo instance, if it's within your domain expertise to run a service like that. It's not hard to operate, it will be blazing fast, it provides most of the same capabilities, and you'll be in complete control over the costs and reliability. A people have replied to you mentioning Codeberg, but that service is intended for Open Source projects, not private commercial work. |
| |
| ▲ | palata 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | This. I have been using Codeberg and self-hosting Forgejo runners and I'm happy. For personal projects though, I don't know for a company. Also very happy with SourceHut, though it is quite different (Forgejo looks like a clone of GitHub, really). The SourceHut CI is really cool, too. |
|
|
| ▲ | ai-christianson 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If you want to go really minimal you can do raw git+ssh and hooks (pre/post commit, etc). |
| |
| ▲ | chasd00 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | i would imagine that's what everyone is doing instead of sitting on their hands. Setup a different remote and have your team push/pull to/from it until Github comes back up. I mean you could probably use ngrok and setup a remote on your laptop in a pinch. You shouldn't be totally blocked except for things like automated deployments or builds tied specifically to github.com Distributed source control is distributable. | | |
| ▲ | peartickle 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's also fun when a Jr. on the team distributes the .env file via Git... | | |
| ▲ | mrweasel 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Couldn't you avoid that with .gitignore and pre-commit hooks? A determined Jr. can still mess it up, but you can minimize the risk. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | yoyohello13 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We self-host Gitlab at work and it's amazing. CI/CD is great and it has never once gone down. |
|
| ▲ | Defelo 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I've been using https://radicle.xyz/ + https://radicle-ci.liw.fi/ (in combination with my own ci adapter for nix flakes) for about half a year now for (almost) all my public and private repos and so far I really like it. |
| |
| ▲ | rirze 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | +1, I like the idea of a peer-distributed code forge. I've been using it as well. |
|
|
| ▲ | lelanthran 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > What are good alternatives to GitHub for private repos + actions? I'm considering moving my company off of it because of reliablity issues. Dunno about actions[1], but I've been using a $5/m DO droplet for the last 5 years for my private repo. If it ever runs out of disk space, an additional 100GB of mounted storage is an extra $10/m I've put something on it (Gitea, I think) that has the web interface for submitting PRs, reviewing them, merging them, etc. I don't think there is any extra value in paying more to a git hosting SaaS for a single user, than I pay for a DO droplet for (at peak) 20 users. ---------------------- [1] Tried using Jenkins, but alas, a $5/m DO droplet is insufficient to run Jenkins. I mashed up shell scripts + Makefiles in a loop, with a `sleep 60` between iterations. |
|
| ▲ | Kelteseth 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Gitlab.com. CI is super nice and easily self hostable. |
| |
| ▲ | misnome 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | And their status history isn't much better. It's just that they are so much smaller it's not Big News. | | |
| ▲ | plagiarist 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | For me it is their history of high-impact easily avoidable security bugs. I have no idea why "send a reset password link to an address from an unauthenticated source" was possible at all. |
| |
| ▲ | MYEUHD 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I heard that it's hard to maintain self-hosted Gitlab instances | | |
| ▲ | 12_throw_away 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Nah at a small scale it's totally fine, and IME pretty pain-free after you've got it running. The biggest pain points are A) It's slow, B) between auth, storage, and CI runners, you have a lot of unavoidable configuration to do, and C) it has a lot of different features so the docs are MASSIVE. | |
| ▲ | cortesoft 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not really. About average in terms of infrastructure maintenance. Have been running our orgs instance for 5 years or so, half that time with premium and half the time with just the open source version, running on kubernetes... ran it in AWS at first, then migrated to our own infrastructure. | |
| ▲ | throwuxiytayq 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I type docker pull like once a month and that's it. | |
| ▲ | Kelteseth 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Uhm no? We have been self-hosting Gitlab for 6 years now with monthly updates and almost zero issues, just apt update && apt upgrade. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | jruz 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I left for codeberg.org and my own ci runner with woodpecker.
Soooo much faster than github |
|
| ▲ | ramon156 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Codeberg is close to what i need |
|
| ▲ | estimator7292 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| At my last job I ran a GitLab instance on a tiny AWS server and ran workers on old desktop PCs in the corner of the office. It's pretty nice if you don't mind it being some of the heaviest software you've ever seen. I also tried gitea, but uninstalled it when I encountered nonsense restrictions with the rationale "that's how GitHub does it". It was okay, pretty lightweight, but locking out features purely because "that's what GitHub does" was just utterly unacceptable to me. |
| |
| ▲ | NewJazz 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | One thing that always bothered me about gitea is they wouldn't even dog food for a long time. GitLab has been developing on GitLab since forever, basically. |
|
|
| ▲ | theredbeard 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Gitlab.com is the obvious rec. |
| |
|
| ▲ | fishgoesblub 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Gitea is great. |
|
| ▲ | xigoi 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| SourceHut. |
|
| ▲ | guluarte 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| gitea |
|
| ▲ | ewuhic 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Don't listen to the clueless suggesting Gitlab. It's forgejo (not gitea) or tangled, that's it. |
| |
| ▲ | tenacious_tuna 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > clueless suggesting Gitlab ad hominem isn't a very convincing argument, and as someone who also enjoys forgejo it doesn't make me feel good to see as the justification for another recommender. | |
| ▲ | Zetaphor 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can you offer some explanation as to why Forgejo and Tangled over Gitlab or Gitea? I personally use Gitea, so I'd appreciate some additional information. | | |
| ▲ | rhdunn 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | From [1] "Forgejo was created in October 2022 after a for profit company took over the Gitea project." Forgejo became a hard fork in 2024, with both projects diverging. If you're using it for local hosting I don't personally see much of a difference between them, although that may change as the two projects evolve. [1] https://forgejo.org/compare-to-gitea/ | |
| ▲ | tenacious_tuna 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm not OP, but; Forgejo is much lighterweight than Gitlab for my usecase, and was cited as a more maintained version of Gitea, but that's just anecdote from my brain and I don't have sources, so take that with a truckload of salt. I'd had a gitea instance before and it was appealing insofar as having the ability to mirror from or to a public repo, it had docker container registry capability, it ties into oauth, etc; I'm sure gitlab has much/all of that too, but forgejo's tiny, tiny footprint was very appealing for my resource-constrained selfhosted environment. | |
| ▲ | xigoi 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | GitLab is slow as fuck and the UI is cluttered with corporate nonsense. |
|
|
