I have been looking for an alternative to Github to host my private repos, Github provides only 1 private repo and for more you have to pay. So I found this. Gitlab has all the features of Github with additional advantages that is completely free and you can have as many private repos as you want. Also in terms of space , its unlimited with a limit of 10 GB per repo which makes it an excellent choice for binary files. You can have unlimited repos (the hard limit is at 100.000 repos per user which you wont reach any time soon ) https://gitlab.com/ https://pages.gitlab.io/ https://www.gitbook.com/ https://www.gitbook.com/editor https://gitlab.com/Kilon/testbook The gitbook documentation is hosted in the pages branch which is a nice clean way to isolate documentation from project's code but also you could alternative have everything in master and put documentation in a doc folder. You can fine tune such setup with the corresponding yaml setup file as can see here https://gitlab.com/Kilon/testbook/blob/pages/.gitlab-ci.yml The website generated by this repo can be viewed here https://kilon.gitlab.io/testbook/ |
I forgot to add that the limit per website hosted is 1GB On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:47 PM Dimitris Chloupis <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
In reply to this post by kilon.alios
bitbucket offers infinite private repos too, if you do not want to install a server by your own.
Esteban
|
One big factor for me has been also repo size , because I make games and as you can imagine I need a lot of space.
Bit bucket has a limit of 2GB per repo while GitLab has a limit of 10GB, so for me GitLab is far better choice. On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 16:31, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Hi, Anything that encourages diversity should be encouraged too. Of
course there is a balance to be found between diversity and
fragmentation and we're a small community, but even trying
different Git front ends without going to the same (monopolistic?)
provider is healthy. For a critical perspective on GitHub and how it affects "open source" I recommend: https://medium.com/@nayafia/we-re-in-a-brave-new-post-open-source-world-56ef46d152a3#.8owyyk8dk (there are a lot of good comments via hypothes.is ) Cheers, Offray On 20/10/16 08:39, Dimitris Chloupis
wrote:
One big factor for me has been also repo size , because I make games and as you can imagine I need a lot of space. |
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
2016-10-20 10:30 GMT-03:00 Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]>:
> bitbucket offers infinite private repos too, if you do not want to install a > server by your own. Gitlab also offers a free SaaS, just like GitHub, or you can download Gitlab and use it on your own premises. Esteban A. Maringolo |
In reply to this post by Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas-2
No , no and no
My fault if I did not make this clear so let me make this crystal Under no circumstance choose GitLab over Github unless the following conditions apply 1) You want unlimited amount of free private repos 2) You want a 10GB repo 3) You want a 1GB webpage 4) You want to deploy at your own server a github like repo hub Open source projects use public repos and for those Github is the best choice. I was one of the first here to recommend pharo developers to move to git and github , that wont change any time soon. In case you are not aware of a private repo is a repo that you wont be able to clone, fork even view online. The only way to do the things you can with a public repo is to be given specific permition and Gitlab offers a huge array of permissions that are about cloning, forking, viewing, creating new issues, merges , pull requests etc. Open source projects would make little to no sense to use a private repo, hence Github remains the best choice mainly because of visibility and exposure. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:31 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Hi, My only underline was about being diverse in infrastructure also. Your personal motivations for choosing GitHub are as good as anyone's for not doing so (including the critical approach Nadja is talking about, which I recommend, again, as a good reading). I don't want to start a holy war anytime somebody mentions a DVCS
that is not Git/GitHub, a format that is not pillar, a license
that is not MIT (and hopefully each time we can focus on arguments
instead of people). Last discussion on licensing made clear for me
why MIT (I had chosen it, but in non image environments my license
choice was different, and I did want to understand the reasons
behind). So we can have a small community, with the constrains of it, and still encouraging a diverse ecosystem, choices and backgrounds. I can understand that community can't support everything, but having a broader view of alternatives and reasons behind is healthy in my opinion. Cheers, Offray On 20/10/16 11:21, Dimitris Chloupis
wrote:
|
well its not much of a problem really, pretty much any git repo website offers ways to mirror repos and keep them in sync. Gitlab also has facilities to import github repos and stay in sync with them. So you can maintain one repo on github and have it automatically update on gitlab and vice versa. Its not about monopoly, its just common logic, if you want the most visibility github remains by far the most popular choice even when compared against other VCSs. From my perspective there is no need for support, I wont be abandoning for example gitup for iceberg anytime soon. I am perfectly ok with working with technologies outside the pharo image and in many cases I prefer it. The reason why I don't tie myself too much into the pharo image is that I can easily move between different technologies like Github and Gitlab. So i dont need Pharo to provide me support for Gitlab , I am already using it . Plus is just git. Its easy to get lost in the ocean of options but then I will never complain about having too many options ;) I love too many options. I was always very vocal about git and github but never had a problem people using alternatives. In the end what matters is the code itself and whatever tool we can use to improve code, is more than welcomed from me. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Hi,
On 20/10/16 12:17, Dimitris Chloupis wrote: > > Its not about monopoly, its just common logic, if you want the most > visibility github remains by far the most popular choice even when > compared against other VCSs. > [...] Popularity has a circular logic: choose something popular/visible because is popular/visible, but for some is more about autonomy, instead of visibility. Pharo and Fossil bring that to me and I think that the Iceberg way is abstracting git and trying to think critically about its workflow, which is also healthy and would add more diversity in the future. > > Its easy to get lost in the ocean of options but then I will never > complain about having too many options ;) I love too many options. > > I was always very vocal about git and github but never had a problem > people using alternatives. In the end what matters is the code itself > and whatever tool we can use to improve code, is more than welcomed > from me. > Agreed. I'm also pretty vocal about diversity, but that includes popular/visible options, while not reducing everything to it. So yes, having options is better for healthier communities and the code/artifacts they produce. Cheers, Offray |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |