Eugen is a user on mastodon.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.
Eugen @Gargron@mastodon.social
Follow

Just realized the weight of moving the primary location of our source code given the number of links to it out there

And the whole forks ecosystem

And the way commit messages refer to GitHub issue numbers

Oof

· Web · 5 · 25

@Gargron Maybe let current version live on github and move to gitlab next version onwards?

@amphetamine @Gargron yep, move from github is going to be hard. But we'll need to do it.

On the other hand, that's only going to get worse over time - even more links, even more forks, even more commit messages.

And maybe Microsoft won't fuck up GitHub, but sensing this vendor lockin now, what would happen if they do?

So it's probably a band-aid that has to be ripped sooner rather than later. 🤔

@Gargron

Won't the links still be fine anyway?

Just set github to Archive mode/Read only after dumping links all over the Github repo :3

@Sir_Boops Yeah but it's just more click-through. Worried about search results rankings too! The importance of findability cannot be overestimated

@Gargron @Sir_Boops there's also the admittedly unlikely possibility that microsoft ruin github so badly that the links won't be accessible any more :o

@Gargron Ah, Ya I forgot about the search rankings...

Ya I can't think of an easy fix for that one 😶

Got approved for a GitLab Ultimate license so that's sorted (although I haven't received it yet)

@Gargron i'm surprised you didn't go with some self-hosted solution like gitea

@valerauko It is self-hosted. It's a license for a self-hosted software.

@Gargron oh ultimate is self-hosted? then just the usual "but it's just another business like github" argument

@valerauko If it's on my domain and my hardware then what github-like argument can you make?

@Gargron me? none. i was referring to the very-libre people who consider gitlab just another evil

@Gargron FWIW, you can move the repo and turn GitHub into a mirror.

GNOME did it before moving to GitLab, and it did improve contributions. (The recent move to GitLab majorly improved collaboration even more — but that's because they had relatively antiquated systems that still needed to be used beore.)

But, basically, you can move and keep the project on GitHub as a mirror. If you do so, I'd suggest having prominent notice in the README and links to the main repo in the README & project URL.

@Gargron GitLab has push mirroring for enterprise edition — does your Ultimate License also support it? docs.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/re

(Otherwise, a mirror can be just another git remote that is pushed to, and that can even be automated.)

@Gargron Oh, nice! GitLab's been moving more and more Enterprise things into CE. Great to hear!

I guess the docs just need updating (just like every software project, ever).

@Gargron @valerauko Biggest risk with self hosted GitLab is @Gargron gets "hit by a bus" and the server eventually stops working. Easily mitigated by working toward placing the project under a fiscal sponsor like @conservancy et al.

@downey @Gargron @valerauko @conservancy

yeah eugen should consider using the conservancy or the similar community-run projects, like the Debian GIt salsa.debian.org

@Gargron what feature do you need that CE lacks?

@qwazix Squash & merge, requiring code reviews before merge to master is possible

@gargron @fla Ending the vendor lockin is overdue. I'm glad that the MSFT purchase happened, because it focused attention on a long-ignored threat to most FOSS projects.

@Gargron Any idea on how to prevent that happening again, now just with GitLab issue numbers and links?

@schmittlauch Seeing how I own the domain and the database, that seems like less of a problem.

@Gargron Ah, didn't know that Ultimate is also licensed to FOSS for self-hosting.

I guess the features you mentioned are also the ones missing from #gitea so far? (Even they develop still on GitHub)

@Gargron I mean just bc GitHub has your issues now doesn't mean that much... You can always use the API to download them and store them in a new repo? Selling this as a service would be pretty top-notch though.

@Gargron I am really happy that people are moving away from GitHub now, even though I don't have a huge problem with GitHub as such.

It was just such a massive monoculture, locking the entire ecosystem into certain tools and patterns.

For instance, as long as GitHub refused to support mercurial, mercurial could not possibly grow and succeed.

@Gargron if there’s any app that benefits from being on decentralized version control it’s probably decentralized social. Host your own gitlab?

@Gargron
this 'and maybe this time it will be different', ain't gonna be.
Thought even just having #microsoft behind is fuxked up, as it means of giving credibilaty to microsoft as being a great company, since even all the free software entheusiast use their plattform...etc.
...but #github was anyway fuxked up from the beginning since it's #proprietary software. From now on it will just be getting worse.

@Gargron I supose you can always keep a mirror on github, while writing that the active repository to submit patches and issues is self-hosted, and that the github mirror is not monitored.

Similar to github.com/WordPress/WordPress?

@mareklach

This.

No point to doing any kind of rage-quit and bridge burning. Just plan, then execute, a pivot, switching around priorities.

You didn't get locked-in all at once. It'll take time, too, to get sufficiently untangled.

@Gargron

@Gargron Vendor lock-in hurts. If Tim Berners Lee had come up with a better URI implementation for HTML than the URL, resources would not be location-dependent now. Domain names have a federated directory service. I don't see why URIs shouldn't. It'd have to update a hell of a lot faster than DNS does, though...

@Gargron This will be an inconvenience to developers at worst; it won't affect end users. You could also leave up the repo with a message that it's been moved. Once you control the domain name you'll be able do write your own redirects going forward.

@Gargron gitlab can push commits too fyi, maybe go that route

@Gargron And all the issues and comments in GitLab would just be in your (the migrator's) name. So, people won't get notified of new comments on the issue till they create accounts and manually follow the issue on GitLab.

@Gargron I hope you'll at least keep up the Github as a mirror so the rest of us can still submit tickets / report bugs.