← Back to context

Comment by sudb

17 hours ago

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.

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.

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.

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

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

    • 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.

      1 reply →

> 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)?

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

    • No, I understood that.

      How? I want to partake in the thought exercise.

      What more could/should GitLab, for example, be doing to capitalize?

      1 reply →