this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2023
263 points (94.3% liked)

Open Source

31205 readers
201 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Cloak@lemmy.ml
kevincox@lemmy.ml
CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml
263
Gitea launches cloud service to provide a secure alternative to GitHub and GitLab (about.gitea.com)
submitted 11 months ago by Zerush@lemmy.ml to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

IME it's way easier to self-host

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 50 points 11 months ago (4 children)

From my personal experience running GitLab and Forgejo (Gitea Drop-In replacement/Fork):

  • Gitea/Forgejo is easier to get running
  • UI is less bloated/faster
  • GitLab redesigned their UI and imo it's shit now
  • No features locked behind a "Pro" Version (Pull or Bidirectional mirrors are for example unavailable on GitLab self-hosted unless you shell out for premium)
  • Gitea Actions is a lot more intuitive than GitLab CI, this is likely personal preference but it's still an important factor
[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I have no experience with forgejo but I agree with all of the above in terms of gitea v gitlab

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Forgejo has different development priorities but feature wise they should be identical since the Forgejo devs also push their code upstream into Gitea

[–] Ullebe1@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Not anymore, since as of October Gitea requires a copyright assignment for contributions. More info here.

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 7 points 11 months ago

huh, would you look at that. Pretty stupid move and something that makes this entire thing even more suspect. Glad I picked Forgejo over Gitea

[–] macattack@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

I didn't have a horse in the race when I was looking to self-host git, but I quickly backed Forgejo when the news came out re: Gitea

[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago

Thirded

[–] Fisch@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago

Definitely agree on the UI part. The UI of Gitea/Forgejo is very intuitive and easy to understand. When you go to a repository you just have the tabs to go to issues etc. and you can always see those at the top. The first time I used GitLab, I found it very unintuitive. There were 2 sidebars on the left side with their respective buttons right on top of each other. Issues and stuff are also in the sidebar, so I couldn't find them immediately.

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Also, with gitea the table of contents for org files are properly rendered in HTML as it should be. As someone that uses org-mode this is a reason to avoid gitlab.

But for most people I'd say the less resources that gitea requires means you save on compute and ultimately is cheaper to host.

I've been running my own gitea server on kubernetes and with istio for over 3 years with no issues.

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I have honestly no idea what the GitLab devs did but their service is such an incredible memory hog it's insane. Obviously GitLab has a pages service tacked onto it but my GitLab instance (mostly legacy but a friend still uses it so it keeps chugging along) eats a whole 5GB of RAM while my Forgejo Instance only uses 200MB. I have no idea where all of that memory is going because it sure as hell isn't going into responsitivity. I've no idea if I configured something wrong or if it's GitLab pages but it's still excessive

[–] poVoq 1 points 11 months ago

Its mostly the default settings of Gitlab being complete overkill for self-hosters. You can cut the requirements down to 25% of the default if you don't use the installer or the default docker compose.

However Gitlab is written in Ruby, while Gitea is written in Golang, so there is definitely some advantage there for Gitea.

[–] h_a_r_u_k_i@programming.dev 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Gitlab used to be cute, small, and innovative (as in open). But now it's too bloated. Gitlab CI is not well designed and half-baked.

[–] rolaulten@startrek.website 4 points 11 months ago

Hey now! Gitlab ci is totally fine so long as your simply running your build.sh file out of it. Anything more and your risking madness.

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

It's even possible to self-host. Afaik you don't get to Self-Host GitHub unless you are a giant corporation.

Edit: nvm I thought it said "GitHub"

[–] NotAnonymousAtAll@feddit.de 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Self-Hosting GitHub is available under the name "GitHub Enterprise", but there is nothing stopping a smaller company from getting an "Enterprise" license. At my job we are running self-hosted GitHub for less than 50 developers.

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 2 points 11 months ago

smaller company

true but then again that isn't quite what I meant with my comment. For an individual looking for a self-hosted forge GitHub just isn't really an option. Pricing aside having to go through a sales channel and then likely not having full control over the software stack is not what individuals look for when they want to host a private git service