Gitlab.com. CI is super nice and easily self hostable.

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.