Code discussion anywhere anytime
Select any code or diff to start discussion. Suggest and apply changes. Discussions stay with code to help code understanding.
How do the discussions stay with the code? Git notes?
goofiw · 1h ago
This looks super cool - especially given the changes to github’s leadership.
One minor note - on mobile safari there didn’t seem to be any state update on press of buttons, and submission was not clear until the backend server seemed to respond. My internet connection is a little slow and it was unclear tapping the button worked. I would expect a little loading state or at least ui to show the button as disabled during submission.
hk1337 · 17m ago
Ooh! My interest is peaked seeing it is written in Java.
kachapopopow · 28m ago
Seems like heavier version of gitea with a pricing section.
Havoc · 18m ago
I recall looking at it maybe 2-3 years ago and deciding against it. And it never seemed to get traction in the selfhosted community either.
...but I can't for the life of me recall why. Definitely wasn't a radioactive red flag issue...but some aspect around CI wasn't for me.
In general though with things like this that carry an open license and have a docker image you're better off trying it yourself than listening to randoms like me
s09dfhks · 15m ago
This is why I dropped it. The CI/CD configurations were some weird proprietary format where as gitlab/gitea/forejo are all (mostly) feature compliant with my already existing github workflow files
elevation · 3m ago
I evaluated moving from Gitea to OneDev before Gitea had CI. OneDev was useable, I didn't mind it, but I don't run java anywhere else so I decided against adopting it. A few years later and now Gitea/Forgejo are at feature parity.
aime4money · 1h ago
Fossil is that you?
fair_enough · 4m ago
Fossil started as "not invented here", but it has grown into something I like a lot more than Git. Knowing how to use a version control system should be an incidental skill (akin to simple shell commands like "cp" and "ln"), not something that needs to be mentioned in a job posting's role description.
I also appreciate that the default workflow for undoing bad merges is a whiteout rather than a true "delete".
To each his own, but having worked with CVS, SVN, Perforce, Git, and Fossil, the centralized model is much less work for release engineering and administration most of the time. If I were a maintainer of the Linux kernel of one of the many Linux distros where you have potentially thousands of contributors to one codebase, I would use git because it scales up better.
However, I wouldn't underestimate the value of scaling down well, especially for all the people around here building some startup out of a barndominium. A VCS that includes its own GUI-based admin tool and is simple enough to used by some high school intro to web design class is a good thing in my book.
odie5533 · 28m ago
Why do people self-host things like this instead of Github or Gitlab? I don't want to maintain more services for my services. Who has time for that.
elevation · 27s ago
One answer might be to avoid LLMs training off the intellectual property that your humans typed out for you. But as LLM code generation tools take off, it's a losing battle for most orgs to prevent staff from using LLMs to generate the code in the first place, so this particular advantage is being subverted.
homebrewer · 15m ago
Our gitea instance had roughly five minutes of downtime in total over the past year, just to upgrade gitea itself. All in the middle of the night. How much downtime has GitHub seen over the same period, and how many people's work was affected by that?
kachapopopow · 20m ago
because:
1) privacy - don't want projects leaving a closed circle of people
2) compliance - you have to self-host and gitlab/github are way too expensive for what they provide when open-source alternatives exist
3) you just want to say fuck you to coorperate (nothing is free) and join the clippy movement.
d12bb · 24m ago
Especially as self-hosting means loosing the community aspect of GitHub. Every potential contributor already has an account. Every new team member already knows how to use it.
hamdingers · 13m ago
As a mirror of my GitHub repositories following the 3-2-1 backup principle.
One minor note - on mobile safari there didn’t seem to be any state update on press of buttons, and submission was not clear until the backend server seemed to respond. My internet connection is a little slow and it was unclear tapping the button worked. I would expect a little loading state or at least ui to show the button as disabled during submission.
...but I can't for the life of me recall why. Definitely wasn't a radioactive red flag issue...but some aspect around CI wasn't for me.
In general though with things like this that carry an open license and have a docker image you're better off trying it yourself than listening to randoms like me
I also appreciate that the default workflow for undoing bad merges is a whiteout rather than a true "delete".
To each his own, but having worked with CVS, SVN, Perforce, Git, and Fossil, the centralized model is much less work for release engineering and administration most of the time. If I were a maintainer of the Linux kernel of one of the many Linux distros where you have potentially thousands of contributors to one codebase, I would use git because it scales up better.
However, I wouldn't underestimate the value of scaling down well, especially for all the people around here building some startup out of a barndominium. A VCS that includes its own GUI-based admin tool and is simple enough to used by some high school intro to web design class is a good thing in my book.