I'm very interested in where ghostty ends up - I wonder if they'll follow Zig to Codeberg?

It does seem like it might, in general, be a very opportune time for GitLab (or another host) to publicly step up!

There seems to be a lot of chatter on X recently about wanting an entirely new GitHub usurper that doesn't look like GitHub at all, but in the short- to medium-term I expect this not to gain a huge amount of traction because of the sheer cultural embeddedness of git + GitHub in modern day software development.

▲

zapnuk 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

GitLab? We use gitlab for work. Its way worse in comparison.

Last week I encountered a bug where my merge request simply didn't show that I deleted a file. Apparently it's because my MR included the creation of a folder with the same name as the basename of the deleted file. Unacceptable for a code hosting platform.

Other than that I miss GH Actions, a clear ui (gitlab has way too many sub-menus), a responsive ui (gitlab feels very sluggish). And while we don't have the Gitlab duo activated, it still pops out regularly eventhough I can't use it besides closing it. ...and I don't even want to start with their issue buard.

It strongly reminds me of Jira in terms of quality, which is no compliment.

▲

madamelic 10 hours ago | parent [-]

At least it isn't Bitbucket.

I think Atlassian and Microsoft are genuinely in a competition to see who can make worse software and still have customers.

▲

sudb 9 hours ago | parent [-]

At this point maybe even Azure DevOps is an improvement

	▲	pxc 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		As someone whose employer uses both: nope, not yet

▲

hamdingers 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Would love to see it become more common for projects with sufficient inertia to host their own forge like GNOME or Inkscape do. Could be a service that foundations like CNCF or LF offer to their projects.

▲

packetlost 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same here. I'm mildly optimistic tangled will go somewhere and be a viable replacement

▲

jonpalmisc 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Eh, I kinda hope not. Codeberg's latency even for just browsing is pretty bad (in my experience) and also is only sporting a single 9 of uptime [1].

I wish Codeberg the best, but I thought it was a questionable choice for Zig and feel similarly for Ghostty—doesn't seem like a strict improvement.

[1] https://status.codeberg.eu/status/codeberg

▲

eddythompson80 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Well, that page took 13 seconds to load for me :/

	▲	winrid an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Could just be the status page software itself. It looks like it uses https://github.com/louislam/redbean-node which is kind of cursed > This automatically generates the tables and columns... on-the-fly. It infers relations based on naming conventions.

▲

preisschild 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Tbf its free software and the quality will go up the more people are using it and contributing.

	▲	eddythompson80 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I haven’t really found that free services scale the same way. It’s hard for the “open source community” to contribute and improve the quality of bottlenecks that are only encountered by one operator. When you take OSS projects that scale well, say Linux, Postgres, Kafka, redis, etc. they either scale up (Linux) which is arguable easier, or were able to scale out because there are thousands, if not millions, that have massive deployments pushing them to their limits. Unless there is some sort of secure way to “open source” operational data for codeberg, or many others running huge deployments of Forgejo I don’t see it being very effective. I do see Google having another go at code hosting though.

▲

ursuscamp 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe Ghostty will follow Zig to Codeberg, but it doesn't seem like a fit to me.

▲

DANmode 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> It does seem like it might, in general, be a very opportune time for GitLab (or another host) to publicly step up!

In what way(s)?

▲

sudb 9 hours ago | parent [-]

As in, to present themselves as the new defacto git host, capitalizing on GitHub's actual + perceived lack of reliability

	▲	DANmode 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		No, I understood that. How? I want to partake in the thought exercise. What more could/should GitLab, for example, be doing to capitalize?