Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com
-
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
From what I have been able to gather, it was issues and bug tracking stuff.
-
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
From what I have been able to gather, it was issues and bug tracking stuff.
Thankfully the GIT protocol keeps distributed copies. So chances are, most people have retained the most important data no matter what happens to GitLab.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
From what I have been able to gather, it was issues and bug tracking stuff.
Thankfully the GIT protocol keeps distributed copies. So chances are, most people have retained the most important data no matter what happens to GitLab.
No Git Repos were affected, only the bug tracking and issues was the last thing I heard.
Did they lose the repos too?
-
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
From what I have been able to gather, it was issues and bug tracking stuff.
Thankfully the GIT protocol keeps distributed copies. So chances are, most people have retained the most important data no matter what happens to GitLab.
No Git Repos were affected, only the bug tracking and issues was the last thing I heard.
Did they lose the repos too?
The ENTIRE company is offline right now. No one knows for sure what is going on. Their main webpage is no longer up, it's just an outage notification. So if they did or did not "lose" the repos, access to them is lost. So right at the moment, yes, the repos are lost and any companies relying on them would be needing to work from local GIT copies. And there is little chance that GitLab is coming back from this, this isn't a "catastrophic event" for them, this appears to be how they designed their IT department to function. No one in their right minds will use their services after this. I can only imagine all of their real customers have been migrating all day via their local repos. GitHub probably picked up nearly everyone in one fell swoop.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
Luckily I just use the product. I don't host anything with them. But his makes me think I need to find anothersolution . I looked at Gogs but you can't do in line comments (the last time I looked a few months ago). I might have to take another look.
-
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
Luckily I just use the product. I don't host anything with them. But his makes me think I need to find anothersolution . I looked at Gogs but you can't do in line comments (the last time I looked a few months ago). I might have to take another look.
I'm using Gogs now. What do you mean by inline comments?
-
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
Luckily I just use the product. I don't host anything with them. But his makes me think I need to find anothersolution . I looked at Gogs but you can't do in line comments (the last time I looked a few months ago). I might have to take another look.
I'm using Gogs now. What do you mean by inline comments?
With gitlab you can do a comment on the whole commit or a comment on a single line of the commit. I think another reason was because of the merge request system. I really liked how theirs works.
-
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
Luckily I just use the product. I don't host anything with them. But his makes me think I need to find anothersolution . I looked at Gogs but you can't do in line comments (the last time I looked a few months ago). I might have to take another look.
I'm using Gogs now. What do you mean by inline comments?
With gitlab you can do a comment on the whole commit or a comment on a single line of the commit. I think another reason was because of the merge request system. I really liked how theirs works.
Fortunately, in Open Source, liking the project you use counts for a lot, lol.
-
GitLab will probably need to focus on their on prem systems now.
-
LVM snapshots are by default only taken once every 24 hours.
So the only use for LVM I can imagine here is they are using logical volumes for the VM storage. Do they really need that? A preallocated QCOW2 gives close to raw speed, I have a hard time believing they need that.
Plus what machine was the snapshot taken from? I thought they were using Ceph for the storage? That was the whole point of them moving to self hosted.
-
Omg I missed this absurdity from the original article:
We are also attempting to move GitLab application servers and supporting services (e.g. PostgreSQL) to bare metal.
-
@dafyre said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
@scottalanmiller said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
GitLab is sounding like a very silly endeavor, indeed.
Ya it sucks because I use their stuff. Hopefully they don't lose everything.
LOL, you called that one!
Luckily I just use the product. I don't host anything with them. But his makes me think I need to find anothersolution . I looked at Gogs but you can't do in line comments (the last time I looked a few months ago). I might have to take another look.
I'm using Gogs now. What do you mean by inline comments?
So I just took a look at it again. Can you still not make comments even on a full commit? I can't find a way to do it at all and it seems people are still asking for it. This seems like a big feature that would be a priority.
-
RhodeCode looks interesting. https://rhodecode.com/
-
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
LVM snapshots are by default only taken once every 24 hours.
So the only use for LVM I can imagine here is they are using logical volumes for the VM storage. Do they really need that? A preallocated QCOW2 gives close to raw speed, I have a hard time believing they need that.
Plus what machine was the snapshot taken from? I thought they were using Ceph for the storage? That was the whole point of them moving to self hosted.
I thought that it was a full move to bare metal, no VMs at all any more. Or very few, at least.
-
@stacksofplates said in Proposed server purchase for GitLab.com:
Omg I missed this absurdity from the original article:
We are also attempting to move GitLab application servers and supporting services (e.g. PostgreSQL) to bare metal.
Yeah, out of their minds.
