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. 🤔
Got approved for a GitLab Ultimate license so that's sorted (although I haven't received it yet)
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 Ah, Ya I forgot about the search rankings...
Ya I can't think of an easy fix for that one 😶
@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? https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/repository_mirroring.html
(Otherwise, a mirror can be just another git remote that is pushed to, and that can even be automated.)
@garrett I think push mirroring is in CE too
@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 what feature do you need that CE lacks?
@qwazix Squash & merge, requiring code reviews before merge to master is possible
@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 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?
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.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!