@orbifx Generally agreed. Specific additions:

- Git CLI, GUI and Magit for additional convenience, is more than enough for everything related to the code itself.

- Issues may be tracked in e.g. an Org-mode files stored in an accompanying repository, same for the WIKI.

- CI/CD and automation of boring tasks in general is a good thing, but is often misused: using tests, where types should be employed, and the bad practices of trying to build it without proofreading the changes just made.

Meanwhile Ansible does that without any Web GUI. The only missing ingredient is the watcher, something to trigger the playbooks by an events.

- Integration of it all and presentation to the management, this is what GitLab is mostly about. And there it tries to phase out proprietary pieces like J**a, T****o, etc.

- Speaking of GH specifically, I'm only there because of the large projects.

@orbifx Few more possibly related points:

The choice is not only between the CLI and bloated and/or proprietary Web applications:

SourceHut (formerly known as sr.ht) focuses on CI/CD, and doesn't reinvent the bicycle. Yet is suitable for e.g. the presentation of one's work without making people jump through hoops.
S***k is another such thing few people dare to replace with an own deployment of Zulip or something. (Jabber & IRC is often not enough. Something in-between e-mail and chat is needed.)
Taiga.io for the more advanced issue and time tracking is also worth mentioning here. Supports sprints and other twists.

Self-hosting is scary or even infeasible for most organizations: reliability, security, etc. -- all of that requires some additional competence.

@amiloradovsky @orbifx you can use something like git bug to track issues within the repo itself, which is better than orgmode since you only need git itself plus an editor-agnostic addon to git.

@orbifx I agree with almost everything you say here, but still don't feel like I shoud ditch github. My main reason is that I would like to move into coding jobs from science jobs so have to depend heavily on demonstrating that I can and do contribute to projects. I could host my own stuff on my own hardware and contributions on github, but then I'm splitting my work over two places. What might you suggest? Ultimately, I would love to ditch it.

@mcol an account on isn't required for you to demonstrate contributions.

You can, for example, clone a project locally or any Gitea (e.g. git.disroot.org), do your changes, either push to your Gitea for them to pull or email them a patch.

Either way, if accepted and they merge it, you will still be credited with the commit-work.

I'd be more impressed by someone using these methods than Github ;)

More here:

If you have pop by in the Lobby.

@orbifx Damn it is tempting me. Gitea is super nice, and self-hosting it might be a fun side project (with possible bonus points). I'm gonna have to look deeper into how my workflow can adjust.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

This is a Mastodon instance primarily intended for (but not limited to) users in Scotland or who identify as Scottish.