forgefed
gitlab-foss
forgefed | gitlab-foss | |
---|---|---|
20 | 47 | |
983 | - | |
0.2% | - | |
5.5 | - | |
7 days ago | - | |
Bikeshed | ||
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal | - |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
forgefed
- Gitlab's ActivityPub architecture blueprint
- PyPy has moved to Git, GitHub
-
Harness launches Gitness, an open-source GitHub competitor
If you don't mind me asking since you're here: will you be implementing ForgeFed in Gitness [0]? My sense is that federation is our best hope for breaking GitHub's network effects, and I'd love to see more projects like yours join the protocol.
[0] https://forgefed.org/
- ForgeFed
-
Gitlab's plan to support ActivityPub for merge requests
From the comments, Forgejo is also already working on implementing ForgeFed, an ActivityPub extension specifically designed for software forges [0]. Judging from the issue, it looks like they're well on their way [1].
I have to say, I'm not super into the idea of social media, but this is a use for federation I approve of wholeheartedly. The friction of having to create accounts on X forges (where X is the number of projects that self-host GitLab) is a huge moat for GitHub, and federation could solve that very handily and create an environment where FOSS projects can feasibly host their own code away from Microsoft's control without horribly inconveniencing everyone who wants to participate.
[0] https://forgefed.org/
[1] https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/59
-
git-appraise – Distributed Code Review for Git
> I agree that e-mail is not perfect, but... how is GitHub better?
Please look at my comment again. I prefer email to locked in forges.
> Devs like new shiny toys, and e-mails are old technology
There is one aspect where such forges have an advantage over email - a better user experience. Aerc and the likes all good - but Github and others provide a good user experience over a tool that everyone uses - the web browser.
> we should have something better than e-mail in 2023
We really should have something better than email. I'm saying this as someone who operates a personal mail server and a bunch of desktop services for it. It's really hard to get the setup correct.
In that context, it's worth looking at forgefed (https://forgefed.org/). It's a protocol for federating forges like Gitea and Gitlab. It's built on top of ActivityPub - which behaves a bit like email (it has inboxes and outboxes for every user). From the spec, it seems like pull requests happen by sending patches to the destination forge.
> Nobody takes the time to try the e-mail workflow (even though it's really two git commands)
Email workflow seems simple. But there are two things that make it complicated:
1. The patches don't specify the commits they apply to. It's simply assumed that they apply to the head of the main branch. The commits have to be carefully rebased on the main branch before sending the patches. It could otherwise lead to conflicts and a lot of wasted time.
2. Each commit/patch is send as a single email. Developers usually make frequent commits when they develop. Such patches can be confusing and hellish to review. A sane patchset requires the developers to edit the commit history, usually using interactive rebases. Each commit should contain a single feature and shouldn't break the build.
I consider both the above to be good development practices and follow them even on my personal projects. However, this is an additional barrier to entry. In fact, this may be a bigger problem for many than setting up git for email.
-
Leveling Up Your Git Server: Sharing Repos with a Friend
Another interesting topic to look into is forge federation. Forgejo [0], the code forge on which Codeberg is based is one forge software that intends to federate their repositories between server instances over the network using ActivityPub protocol extensions such as ForgeFed [1] and F3 [2] specifications.
[0] https://forgejo.org
[1] https://forgefed.org
[2] https://lab.forgefriends.org/friendlyforgeformat
- Sono Moreno di Morrolinux. AMA!
-
Let's Make Sure Github Doesn't Become the only Option
> If you want to look into people who disagree with you: https://forgefed.org/
gitlab-foss
-
GitHub Actions Are a Problem
* Gitlab EE (enterprise edition) is closed, but Gitlab CE (community edition) is open source (https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/)
* I didn't follow the Gitea drama too closely, but my understanding is that Forgejo was a fork born out of that situation
* I've heard the SourceHut guy is a controversial figure, so avoiding it because of that isn't unreasonable. I will just say that "spite forks" tend not to last very long
-
Server-Side Request Forgery in Rails
Gitlab uses an UrlBlocker class to prevent malicious users from exploiting SSRF via the webhook URL. This class validates the URL and blocks everything which is a local network, but before the 11.5.1 version, they didn't think about an IPv6 format, which maps to IPv4: [0:0:0:0:0:ffff:127.0.0.1]. Replacing the part of 127.0.0.1 to any IP address also worked, and this vulnerability made it possible to send requests to the internal network of a GitLab instance. You can read the issue report here: (https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/issues/53242 )[https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/issues/53242]
-
Automating deployment to kubernetes
I recommend Auto DevOps and hooking your project up to the Kubernetes cluster. Auto DevOps is a standard CI/CD template that GitLab uses by default when .gitlab-ci.yml is not present. It can automatically package up certain types of applications, including those with a Dockerfile in the root of the repo. If the project is hooked up to a Kubernetes cluster and all the right variables are present, it builds that docker image and then fills in a Helm chart template containing that image and deploys it to the cluster.
-
Beautifying our UI: Giving Gitlab build features a fresh look
Thanks. This was also requested for the UI 7 years ago
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/-/issues/12776
and then closed with the claim that this was implemented, when in fact, it was not.
-
How we cut down our CI build times by 50%
Similar to fsync, these are designed to ensure data integrity, but in a test setup, they don't matter. You can read more about these in the Postgres doc on non-durability. and explore some benchmarks from Gitlab here. Interestingly, CircleCI's old Postgres images had these features disabled by default, but the newer ones don't seem to.
-
Is Jenkins still the king?
Most all of those things are possible with Argo Workflows or Tekton with very great effort. But a sustainable system with all the features built-in.
- So weird, stage named test is not displayed in pipeline
-
Gitlab for FOSS reporting
If you wish to clone a copy of GitLab without proprietary code, you can use the read-only mirror of GitLab located at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss/. However, please do not submit any issues and/or merge requests to that project.
-
Gitlab runners unable to clone over http(s) when git access set to SSH only.
GitLab versions 10.7 and later, allow the HTTP(S) protocol for Git clone or fetch requests done by GitLab Runner from CI/CD jobs, even if you select Only SSH.
-
No words v2💀
it sure does
What are some alternatives?
kyoto - Golang SSR-first Frontend Library
gitlab
gitness - Gitness is an Open Source developer platform with Source Control management, Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery.
emacs - Mirror of GNU Emacs
cicada - A FOSS, cross-platform version of GitHub Actions and Gitlab CI
CryptPad - Collaborative office suite, end-to-end encrypted and open-source.
killed-by-microsoft - Part guillotine, part graveyard for Microsoft's doomed apps, services, and hardware.
taiga-docker - [Moved to: https://github.com/taigaio/taiga-docker]
git-appraise - Distributed code review system for Git repos
cmark-gfm - GitHub's fork of cmark, a CommonMark parsing and rendering library and program in C
markup - Determines which markup library to use to render a content file (e.g. README) on GitHub