I think the tweet <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003409836170547200" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003409836170547200</a> and the homepage update <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-com&#x2F;www-gitlab-com&#x2F;commit&#x2F;7c9e6703fb23e9bd6409f7be260ed4e3c87c4d2a" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-com&#x2F;www-gitlab-com&#x2F;commit&#x2F;7c9e6703...</a> happened around the same time. I think #movingtogitlab caused the traffic.

I just moved all of my repos over from github so actually I&#x27;m some of the problem haha. :)

No, folks really are moving. I&#x27;ve imported about 2 dozen of my projects from github and my coworkers and friends are doing the same.

I think that the topic &#x27;privacy&#x27; isn&#x27;t the main factor in this case. Most stuff on platforms like GitHub and GitLab are public anyway and shouldn&#x27;t include any private stuff.In my case i simply want to move since i really dislike microsoft and their business decisions. I simply don&#x27;t want to be involved in any &quot;direct&quot; way with this company. Microsoft doesn&#x27;t have much control over GitLab, just because they use their servers. But Microsoft will have a lot of control over GitHub.

Post from 5th April 2018 on their blog says:&quot;We’re already in the process of migrating GitLab.com to Google Cloud Platform.&quot;[1]So looks like they wont be on Azure for much (?) longer?1 - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;04&#x2F;05&#x2F;gke-gitlab-integration&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;04&#x2F;05&#x2F;gke-gitlab-integration&#x2F;</a>Edit: Found this super-interesting architecture overview: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;handbook&#x2F;infrastructure&#x2F;production-architecture&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;handbook&#x2F;infrastructure&#x2F;production-...</a>

The irony of this whole thing being that GitLab is hosted on Azure...

The only people who will see that ad are those who have already decided to check out GitLab today. It’s a convincer, not a traffic driver.

The user actually did. The website redirected.imgur has figured out how and when it&#x27;s safe to redirect PNG&#x2F;JPG requests to a &quot;JS blob&quot; (of advertising), unfortunately. They tried to pull this a few months ago, completely bungled &lt;img&gt; embeds, and had to turn it off in a hurry. I think they&#x27;ve figured it out this time, sadly!Time for a new image host... imgur has gone all high-level and &quot;scale&quot;-ey, it would seem (particularly with the new video with sound thing).I was going to say something about toxicity, but this is sadly just a scaling problem. Now that sound - and competing with youtube - is the new &quot;major consideration&quot;, just being a competent works-anywhere image host has been relegated to the region of rounding errors, so it doesn&#x27;t matter in the same way if they get that right anymore.:(

Thanks for the image! But next time, please post a direct link instead of the JS blob that Imgur has become. &lt;3

A lot of this traffic is probably due to the opportunistic advertisement on GitLab&#x27;s home page for non signed-in users: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.imgur.com&#x2F;ZNikKcJ.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.imgur.com&#x2F;ZNikKcJ.png</a>

&gt; your redundancy is on your local machine and on every machine of your org*any machine that has pulled recently.There is definitely value in having a mirror that is always live and updating.

&gt; The nature of git itself obviates your case.My typical case involves more areas.I value having a way for developers to push&#x2F;pull changes to a well-known agreed-upon place, as well as to read&#x2F;post&#x2F;comment on pull requests, tag&#x2F;branch&#x2F;integrate for releases, and always-on always-updating availability.Orgs that are my clients do not have default employee machines that are automatically ready to push&#x2F;pull to each other.This can be because of a range of technical areas e.g. employee machine firewalls, continuous integration server configurations, disk space storage size for large files, etc.This can be because of a range of process areas e.g. a dev team wants to do a git flow that uses pull requests and code review comments, or a legal team wants an audit trail, or a management group wants a dashboard to do updates, etc.

The nature of git itself obviates your case. If Github gets tumultuous, your redundancy is on your local machine and on every machine of your org.Replication of issues, wiki, etc to other hosting providers just sounds like a PITA.If the concern is about Microsoft buying Github and someone gets flighty, I think it’s a little dramatic.Microsoft isn’t about to rock the boat here, neither is Github.Expect marginal, fleeting downtime, marginal pricing changes, and generally higher confidence in GH surviving in the long run.

It probably also makes sense to try to backup as much as you can from Github: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github-backup.branchable.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github-backup.branchable.com&#x2F;</a>Does something like that exist for gitlab?

IMHO it&#x27;s wise to distribute repos to GitLab and also to other hosting solutions beyond just GitHub.One reason is because acquisitions can sometimes be tumultuous, such as because of employee changes, security changes, alerting changes, etc. A backup git host is prudent.

The whole point is that some people do want the control that comes with self-hosting, and GitHub does not provide a way to do that.

If you don&#x27;t want to host your own solution, then just use GitLab&#x27;s hosted service.  It is free.

It doesn&#x27;t matter when people are wanting the community and aren&#x27;t wanting to host their own solution.

I&#x27;ve also heard about gitea, which is apparently a fork of Gogs with the only difference being more maintainers.Does anyone know of any more substantial differences? Which should I choose?

There is also Gitbucket - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitbucket.github.io&#x2F;gitbucket-news&#x2F;gitbucket&#x2F;2018&#x2F;05&#x2F;29&#x2F;gitbucket-4.25.0.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitbucket.github.io&#x2F;gitbucket-news&#x2F;gitbucket&#x2F;2018&#x2F;05...</a>Now with LFS, code review, etc features. Built on the JVM - blazing performance.

This is also an interesting read on alternatives if you want to host on a RaspberryPi: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitbucket.github.io&#x2F;gitbucket-news&#x2F;gitbucket&#x2F;2017&#x2F;03&#x2F;29&#x2F;benchmark-of-gitbucket.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitbucket.github.io&#x2F;gitbucket-news&#x2F;gitbucket&#x2F;2017&#x2F;03...</a>

Gogs is another great foss git alternative, and easier to run for small sites. We use it at ZeroTier.

Unlike GitHub though Atlassian isn&#x27;t just working on GitHub but many other tools for developers. This includes JIRA, Confluence and so on. GitHub is mostly focused on repositories. This is why devs had to write a letter to GitHub to tell them hey can you guys seriously work on the Issues system? With the resources of Microsoft it will not surprise me to see a much more open and capable GitHub.

I think this needs to go even further. If federation is done using an open standard like ActivityPub, then any services using the protocol would be able to federate. At that point it wouldn&#x27;t matter what people are running, they&#x27;d all be able to talk to each other.

Yes yes yes, federation is needed.People on GitHub is not just to sharing codes, but also to get in touch with each others. GitHub succeed because it&#x27;s not only just a free online Git repo services, but also a developer + user community where you can put your code on, share it, and &#x27;earn&#x27; stars &amp; forks as feedback. And stars + forks can help you stand out in a job interview and many other occasions.Bitbucket is another Git repo service, but it sort of failed to build it&#x27;s community. Result? It received less attentions compare GitHub.So, while GitLab is also trying to be &#x27;yet-another&#x27; Git repo + you can host it on your own, the benefits of become community can&#x27;t be ignored. And federation can help that by connecting all the GitLab instances together to form a bigger and global community.Even better, the federation protocol itself can be an open-sourced public standard, so all the other Git repo software can implement that in their product. The potential is huge.

That sounds like something just waiting for copyright abuse and its ensuing enforcement hell. &quot;This GitLab instance has been shut down permanently by the FBI and ICE&quot;

Would be nice if Microsoft gets onboard for such a protocol. Especially once they own GitHub. Would also be funny if Microsoft Open Sources GitHub much to everyone&#x27;s surprise.

The current talks are about basing it on ActivityPub which is an open spec but of course it would only work on software which supports it.

Yes, federation would be great for git. I just hope that an open protocol is designed rather than something GitLab specifc. GitLab takes a lot of resources to self-host.

&gt;GitLab is a lot like Firefox, or &quot;Linux on the desktop&quot; in that way. It&#x27;s what a lot of us want to use, but the less-open but more-polished option has always seemed the more pragmatic choice. But that can change.I wonder if this move by GitHub is motivated by them seeing this writing on the wall.

I have been using gitlab heavily for the last year and since then nothing terrible has happened. The worst thing was for one day it was pretty slow but was fixed the next day and no data was lost.GitLab today in my opinion is now a better piece of software than github.

People here are deluding themselves. Gitlab, without gobs of VC money and the promise of a big IPO payday, is an abandoned open-source project with a tiny fraction of the team that built the code. So yes, you can fork the code, but without the money and resources of the parent company, good luck keeping it up to date! Worst case, you get another mysql: neglected by an acquiring company, with lots of bureaucracy and infighting and IP tangles to slow things down.Gitlab is essentially salting the earth for dev tool startups. I had my issues with Github, but at least they had built a business around a dev tool, behaved ethically and gave back generously, and so I wished them well. To see so many people dropping them for a fauxpen-source competitor whose primary selling point is “it’s free!” just makes me sad.If you want nice things, you have to pay for them. If you aren’t, I guarantee you that someone else is, and they’re the ones with control.

As a faithful Fx user since 1.5, I&#x27;m not sure about Firefox analogy.Its market share was actually much higher in the past and only went down (the introduction of Quantum didn&#x27;t really help market share wise).And in term of polishness.. Firefox was MILES ahead of any browser for a very long time. When Chrome launched, it was as horrible as you can think in term of functionality, and Firefox at that time was already as solid as today. But Chrome advances very fast. People often attribute Chrome&#x27;s success (merely) to Google&#x27;s push, but Chrome&#x27;s technological development plays a bigger role IMO.

I use it for reals at my job. Enterprise version. I love it.

We deploy GitLab locally and it’s a great experience.

I certainly disagree with this comparison.I&#x27;ve been using linux on the desktop for over 15 years with no intention to ever stop the near future.I had been using firefox since its first release under the name phoenix then firebird then firefox (I had been using mozilla suite before that) and I&#x27;ve stopped with no intent to ever come back to it when mozilla finally killed what made firefox useful to me after a lengthy agony process (BTW the claim of firefox being not performant enough 2 years ago is totally unsubstantiated as I used it daily with over 250 tabs open concurrently without a single hiccup despite having 35 extensions loaded as they were required to put back the useful features mozilla had removed, to remove the unwanted cruft mozilla has added and to add the necessary features mozilla refused to add). I have now switch to waterfox, and its name says it all.So really comparing gitlab to linux on the desktop means gitlab will never happen, and comparing gitlab to firefox means it will be mishandled into irrelevance by a shady finance operation aiming for market domination.To me Gitlab seems a better alternative to proprietary and centralized github that will be bought at some point in the not so distant future, has been my stance on this matter. That Microsoft is the one buying would not have been my first bet but is not a huge surprise either considering their change of PR to jump on the opensource bandwagon as an attempt to extend their agony further.

&gt; Recently (just as most of the world has apparently moved on from desktop computing, haha) Linux is pretty much fine for the traditional desktop computing.It&#x27;s been fine for the past decade, it&#x27;s just the trope of &quot;Linux on the desktop&quot; that&#x27;s slow to die.

It should change and suspect quick. The big tech companies will have to move off of GitHub and go somewhere.So either they do it themselves which is a risk or looks like GitLab.

&gt; Recently (just as most of the world has apparently moved on from desktop computing, haha) Linux is pretty much fine for the traditional desktop computing.It&#x27;s exactly because the world has moved away from desktop computing that Linux on the desktop has become viable: collaboration tools are increasingly web-based (or is at least web-enabled for the 80%-usecase), and those tools are exactly what tends to anchor an organisation on a single platform. These days, even Outlook has a perfectly usable web-interface that works fine in Chrome and Firefox.

&gt; But that can change.That&#x27;s because change is the only constant.

&gt; Linux is pretty much fine for the traditional desktop computingYeah, on the desktop things are getting better. But ... everybody is moving to the smartphone. And there things are getting worse. For example, my Banking app works only on 2 platforms, which are not open.

Off topic but I couldn&#x27;t get hibernate to work on Ubuntu Linux. I purchased a laptop with Linux pre-installed; but apparently, if a manufacturer claims to support Linux on a laptop, that does not include hibernate support. Now that we&#x27;ve reached the milestone of Linux on a desktop, I&#x27;m looking forward to the Year Of Linux On The Laptop.

GitLab is a lot like Firefox, or &quot;Linux on the desktop&quot; in that way. It&#x27;s what a lot of us want to use, but the less-open but more-polished option has always seemed the more pragmatic choice.But that can change.Recently (just as most of the world has apparently moved on from desktop computing, haha) Linux is pretty much fine for the traditional desktop computing. I have current Mac, Windows, and Ubuttnu on my desk, and they are essentially interchangeable except for a few special-case purposes (say, Final Cut video editing, or opening one of those weird wonky Excel sheets that only open on Windows).Firefox, too, is suddenly performant and I&#x27;ve switched to it as my main browser (for default website use) — something absolutely, utterly unimaginable two years ago.I hope that GitLab is reaching the same kind of transition point. I&#x27;ve heard horror stories from people that used it 2-3 years ago and are happy to be back on GitHub. But I don&#x27;t hear much recent grumbling. I moved a toy project to it and it seems nice. As fast as GitHub for me (though I am in Japan, and GitHub is slow in Japan). More features. A nice, sort of adult&#x2F;professional aesthetic. And — yay! — the open source core it&#x27;s always had.I might be wrong, since I haven&#x27;t used it for reals, but it looks like they might have hit that critical usability threshold?Open source and worse isn&#x27;t a very compelling sales pitch. But an open source tool that is broadly equivalent to a closed source one is generally more attractive, especially when you&#x27;re talking about services that will be used as part of your core infrastructure.

Interestingly, exactly the feature you mentioned is just being open sourced due to high community demand and it being free in its competitors: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;34591#note_57200169" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;34591#note_57...</a>

I think it&#x27;s important to clarify that even though GitLab&#x27;s core is open source, its own business model is built on the idea of an enterprise version that includes proprietary code.
Many useful &quot;advanced&quot; features, such as &quot;squash and merge&quot; are only included in the EE.

For me, the one thing keeping me using Github for most of my public projects have so far been discoverability. I use Gitlab for all of my private projects.To the extent that I think really the only thing I&#x27;d want to see to not need Github any more would be some sort of federated social&#x2F;discoverability&#x2F;search layer similar to what you&#x27;re describing.

Is GitLab Java based? How does Oracle feature in this?

I wish it was Gogs that became this popular instead. Spreading Java and Oracle&#x27;s influence even further is going to be a bad idea for the future.

&gt; For people wondering what makes GitLab any differentnobody wonders that, as every week there’s a post on HN prising gitlab.

GitLab has taken VC money too. Including from a Google-connected investment group. There&#x27;s no guarantee they won&#x27;t be bought out etc. some day. They too are looking for a big exit for investors.Their commitment to free&#x2F;libre&#x2F;open values is not 100% but is far more than GitHub. The fully-FLO CE part is truly a completely usable product. They have zero proprietary client-side JavaScript. They publish the source for their proprietary stuff (last I checked anyway) but have a restricted license. And they&#x27;ve actively worked with the FSF and volunteers to meet the GNU ethical repo criteria <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;repo-criteria-evaluation.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;repo-criteria-evaluation.html</a>So, GitLab is not quite Mozilla (which is itself not quite Wikimedia or GNU level dedication). But GitLab is still a standout in FLO-commitment compared to the mediocre norm.

How is GitLab funded? How real is their commitment to open source?

For people wondering what makes GitLab any different, the answer is that GitLab is an open source product at its core. This means that anybody can run their own instance. If the company ends up moving in a direction that the community isn’t comfortable with, then it’s always possible to fork it.There’s also a proposal <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ee&#x2F;issues&#x2F;4517" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ee&#x2F;issues&#x2F;4517</a> to support federation between GitLab instances. With this approach there wouldn’t even be a need for a single central hub. One of the main advantages of Git is that it’s a decentralized system, and it’s somewhat ironic that GitHub constitutes a single point of failure.In theory this could work similarly to the way Mastodon works currently. Individuals and organizations could setup GitLab servers that would federate between each other. This could allow searching for repos across the federation, tagging issues across projects on different instances, and potentially fail over if instances mirror content. With this approach you wouldn’t be relying on a single provider to host everybody’s projects in one place.

You have the source, and people can always fork.

You can self-host Gitlab easily (I manage two fairly big instances, with hundreds of users).

It&#x27;s only partially open source. They let you smell the freedom, but you can&#x27;t really have it.

While I highly doubt that, GitLab is Open Source - Github is not Open Source.

Next week we might learn that Oracle bought GitLab.There is no escape with such huge centralization...

Sorry to say it like this but you’ve been working on your performance problems for years now and you’re still at the same place. I think your problems run much deeper than that.

Do you publicly document your performance improvements? It would be cool to have a chart showing time to push or something, and let people see that trend go down as you are working on it. It would inspire confidence. Like others have said, you have had dealbreaking performance issues for a long time now.

Is there any documentation on Gitaly? I am exploring different filesystems and it will be helpful to learn about Gitaly.

In this very minute my team is unable to deploy (and therefore accumulating blockings) because of issues with Gitlab. We have a plan on-hold to migrate off Gitlab (even though we just migrated to it!) and while I&#x27;d love to stay on Gitlab it&#x27;s becoming very hard to justify.

A big problem seems to be stability&#x2F;error reporting and averaging of statistics. I&#x27;ve frequently had the following experience:- I can&#x27;t push or something in general goes wrong with one of my repos (but not others).- Gitlab&#x27;s status page is green- Other people are having issues on Twitter and tweeting @gitlabstatus about it but there is not general across-the-board outageThis seems to indicate that Gitlab tolerates (and very often has) a reasonable amount of instability and error rates across its platform, but just takes the average of these as a baseline of performance: i.e. it&#x27;s a very spikey graph with a reasonably high average line fit.This tweet supports this impression:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlabstatus&#x2F;status&#x2F;1000001988183158785" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlabstatus&#x2F;status&#x2F;1000001988183158785</a>&quot;Errors should be down to normal&quot; - the idea that there is an non-zero error rate that is openly described as &quot;normal&quot; is worrying. Not that I&#x27;d expect a constant zero error rate, but at least aiming for it should be a consideration.

I&#x27;m sorry that you had a bad experience with GitLab.com self-hosted runners and pushes. I can&#x27;t place the CI runners not working entire days. Pushes to GitLab.com should not take minutes. They do take longer then to GitHub.com and we&#x27;re working on performance improvements, including deprecating NFS for Gitaly and more performant size checks that just got merged.

Noticed this too recently, makes me more wary to import my projects there. Just browsing a repo is painfully slow. Although I&#x27;ve noticed the same on github for large source files or large repos.

Ironically, the status page itself takes 5-6 seconds to load!

Agreed.I love GitLab and it’s UI, but recently the performance of the hosted version is awful (not sure why - just being overloaded?).In fact, even their own status page reflects it: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;status.gitlab.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;status.gitlab.com&#x2F;</a> - the current “project HTTP response time” is around one second which makes me cry when using the UI.I wish them the best but would be moving to a competitor (or maybe a self-hosted GitLab) in the meantime until they sort it out.

Sorry about that. We had to rescale the Grafana instance due to increased traffic and hit a snag. It&#x27;s being actively worked on.

Adding to this, it now seems that monitor.gitlab.net that&#x27;s linked in the top post is sending &quot;502 Bad Gateway&quot;.

It reduces the complexity of your ops environment. Not the OP, but we do the same thing (though not with GL). When you only have a couple of developers, it makes sense to keep everything in house because your cost is essentially a couple of hours keeping things up and running as well as having an extra development machine somewhere. When you are a large organisation it also makes sense because you have a whole bunch of ops people keeping things running. Somewhere in between there is an awkward point where you&#x27;ve got enough complexity that you&#x27;ll need to hire an ops person to handle it, but you don&#x27;t have the organisational infrastructure to deal with that hire. Outsourcing is actually less risky because you&#x27;re essentially piggy backing on somebody else&#x27;s large organisation. A single bad hire isn&#x27;t going to sink you, for example.

What&#x27;s the alternative? Writing your own CI&#x2F;CD system from scratch? You&#x27;re going to be relying on some external dependency for important things anyway, you just have to pick one that is dependable.

&gt; we&#x27;ve had entire days where the team was unable to deploy because the CI workers did not run (even though we host the workers)I find it boggling that a commercial team chooses to accept this kind of external dependency. What do they offer which makes it worth the extra risk?

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlabstatus&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003439258814877697?s=21" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlabstatus&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003439258814877697?...</a>This link is for the monitoring page. The imports are going through.

Sorry about that. The 502 was only on our public monitoring dashboard for a short time. GitLab.com itself is up and running and the monitoring dashboard is back online now.

To be fair the page worked fine until it was hugged by HN &#x2F; Reddit...

Irony is that the page this post links to is 502’ing right now. Disappointing...

I was using GitLab for about a year until a few months ago. The reason was sluggishness and how power-hungry it was. My Gitea server consumes considerably less resources and is faster.Not to mention, it’s visually customizable.

It appears that the workaround is open source, though, and is loaded in the open source version?<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;lib&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;sidekiq_middleware&#x2F;shutdown.rb" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;lib&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;...</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;config&#x2F;initializers&#x2F;sidekiq.rb#L15" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;gitlabhq&#x2F;blob&#x2F;master&#x2F;config&#x2F;init...</a>Many other reasons to be concerned about performance, but there&#x27;s no evidence that they&#x27;re withholding essential features like this from their free version.

Can&#x27;t you use jemalloc for sidekiq?
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;brandonhilkert.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;reducing-sidekiq-memory-usage-with-jemalloc&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;brandonhilkert.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;reducing-sidekiq-memory-usag...</a>

The fact that it&#x27;s acceptable to restart sidekiq instead of working on fixing the memory leaks in the first place is a perfect example everything that&#x27;s wrong with software engineering in Ruby land.Reminds me of the classic &quot;The main Rails application that DHH created required restarting ~400 times&#x2F;day. That’s a production application that can’t stay up for more than 4 minutes on average&quot;.

Another performance issue is Sidekiq leaking memory, which the enterprise edition has a work around for but the community edition does not:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.gitlab.com&#x2F;ee&#x2F;administration&#x2F;operations&#x2F;sidekiq_memory_killer.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.gitlab.com&#x2F;ee&#x2F;administration&#x2F;operations&#x2F;sidekiq...</a>

&gt; the frogs who did not jump out in time will be boiled to death in the slowly heating water.That’s a myth: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Boiling_frog" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Boiling_frog</a>

The focus is on long term freedom here, not occasional performance issues. People who are migrating projects right now to GitLab are implying that Microsoft will push the site&#x27;s policies in unwanted directions. And the frogs who did not jump out in time will be boiled to death in the slowly heating water.

We use a self hosted GitLab, it is really fast and stable. Also the CI is very reliable and fast.

Ironically, the OP currently just waits at spinners forever for me, perhaps because so many people are trying to look at the graphs from the HN post (although one would think that page would rely on cached info and easily scale...)

GitLab&#x27;s recent performance has been abysmal. We recently moved from a self-hosted git solution to GitLab, and while the CI, &#x27;namespacing&#x27; and issue tracking are truly great and well thought of, we&#x27;ve had entire days where the team was unable to deploy because the CI workers did not run (even though we host the workers), and therefore the artifacts for deployment were never generated. And nearly every day, pushes take minutes to complete, as opposed to a few seconds with GitHub.If anything, I hope that Microsoft&#x27;s acquisiton of GitHub means that GitHub is going to keep growing in features for varied enterprise uses, and that we&#x27;re going to see even more competition in this area.

You can set whatever address you want in your commit, it doesn&#x27;t have to match the one in your account.

This seems a little off-kilter. If you&#x27;re that concerned, set a dummy email address in your &quot;~&#x2F;.gitconfig&quot;, or your project-specific &quot;.git&#x2F;config&quot;. I mean, I could just clone the repository if I wanted, and if I wanted to scrape it I could certainly do that too.You can have multiple addresses associated with your GitLab as well, so you can add the dummy one to make sure your profile metadata still shows up.

Thanks for the love Teeer! We&#x27;ve created an issue to track this feature, feel free to follow if it you&#x27;d like <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;47190" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;47190</a>

You don&#x27;t have to use your personal email address in commits if you wish to keep it private on GitHub:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;about-commit-email-addresses&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;about-commit-email-addresse...</a>

You can&#x27;t hide it on github either.  You can just look at the commits directly, and I&#x27;ve used this to contact people in the past due to the &quot;UI&quot; hiding it.  It&#x27;s nothing more than the thinnest bit of obfuscation, and easily overcome.

I&#x27;m talking about this. A GitHub specific feature that helps people out.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.github.com&#x2F;2017-04-11-private-emails-now-more-private&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.github.com&#x2F;2017-04-11-private-emails-now-more-p...</a>

That&#x27;s not gitlab or github, that&#x27;s how git works.

I love GitLab, and I use a private instance at work, but I won&#x27;t use it to store my public projects for one sole reason: you can&#x27;t hide your email address shown in commits.

Migrating repos are straightforward.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.gitlab.com&#x2F;ee&#x2F;user&#x2F;project&#x2F;import&#x2F;github.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.gitlab.com&#x2F;ee&#x2F;user&#x2F;project&#x2F;import&#x2F;github.html</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=VYOXuOg9tQI" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=VYOXuOg9tQI</a><pre><code> At its current state, GitHub importer can import:
 the repository description (GitLab 7.7+)
 the Git repository data (GitLab 7.7+)
 the issues (GitLab 7.7+)
 the pull requests (GitLab 8.4+)
 the wiki pages (GitLab 8.4+)
 the milestones (GitLab 8.7+)
 the labels (GitLab 8.7+)
 the release note descriptions (GitLab 8.12+)
 the pull request review comments (GitLab 10.2+)
 the regular issue and pull request comments
 References to pull requests and issues are preserved (GitLab 8.7+)
 Repository public access is retained. If a repository is private in GitHub it will be created as private in GitLab as well.</code></pre>

GitLabStatus tweet <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlabstatus&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003439258814877697" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlabstatus&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003439258814877697</a>

We&#x27;re currently rescaling the monitoring box to accommodate for all the extra traffic. We ran out of RAM which caused prometheus to crash.

I hope our public monitoring will stay up. If not the same graph can be viewed in <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003409836170547200" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003409836170547200</a>

given some high profile imports i wonder if some people got some insider news ahead of the (still seemingly unofficial) announcements.

Thanks for the kind words. I&#x27;m glad you like the swag and enjoy using GitLab.

GitLab is awesome as a broke amateur dev with 0 way to really give back to GitLab the team was cool enough to send me a tshirt and stickers. Its come a long way since then but they seem to be awesome. I dont know if the msft acq is generally even a bad thing, but its great there are options either at GitLab.com or as a self-run service for people to change over to if they want. Congrats!

Gitea community is what Gogs community should have been in the first place. Gitea looks nice but there are no public instances. I only wish <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;notabug.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;notabug.org</a> would move to Gitea instead of sticking to Gogs...

Have you tried Gitea? I found it to be much nicer, and the community around it has been very helpful by comparison.

I recommend gogs for its much smaller footprint.

it&#x27;s early monday morning for a good portion of their on call staff.

Keep up the good work! The next few weeks could get interesting (:

This is your superbowl&#x2F;worldcup&#x2F;elections night&#x2F;etc! Good luck!

Thanks for your concern :) Many from our team are indeed on high alert.

Getting a 502. I feel sorry for the Gitlab on-call right now; the rumors came in a day too early to fully enjoy the weekend.

I&#x27;m just wondering what the atmosphere will be like on Gitlab compared to Github.Github in general to me seems very bubbly and emoji-filled, or to put it into a word - _fun_. For better or worse, it won&#x27;t be the same. This is not to say that Gitlab would be bad, just that it would be different.I&#x27;m just incredibly curious to see what it ends up looking like.

By buying GitHub. Now the big tech companies will have to move to something else and we will have fragmentation.It does look like most will move to GitLab so if it just becomes the new GitHub that would be fine.Just hope we do not end up with each just hosting their code on their own site. Which this might cause.

Barely even started. Would expect the big guys to move their projects.Finally a single and neutral site and MS messes it up.

Turnkey is a great way to get GitLab up and running. However, please note that the latest version of Turnkey is based on GitLab version 8.3 (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.turnkeylinux.org&#x2F;updates&#x2F;gitlab" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.turnkeylinux.org&#x2F;updates&#x2F;gitlab</a>) which is nearly 2.5 years old. Check out <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;downloads" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;downloads</a> for information on various installation methods which make it easy to install and keep GitLab updated.

I&#x27;ve been using this in a VM since forever: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.turnkeylinux.org&#x2F;gitlab" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.turnkeylinux.org&#x2F;gitlab</a>

No doubt the recent Microsoft takeover news has fueled the spike.At MS heart is simply money. Nothing else.When push-comes-to-shove and a decision in the future is between doing the right thing for the open source community, and making an extra buck you can count on MS to go with the latter every time.

Your probably right, but it&#x27;s because Microsoft understand enterprises many others, like me, want nothing to with them. Because you are not the customer they want, however, they really try to make you think you are.They seem to very deliberately have marketed to middle and upper management for decades. These are levels the majority of companies barely have! Most companies are small, the kind of companies GitHub is &#x27;built&#x27; for.

Google works better with the enterprise, and is far cheaper than Microsoft.

This is very true. Paid consumers as well... if I have a problem with a Microsoft product I can call an 800 number and talk to a human and generally get a resolution in a matter of hours at the max. Can&#x27;t really do that with Google.

No there would be more. Especially from enterprise users. Microsoft understands enterprise. Google doesnt.

Far be it from me to question the distrust, but I&#x27;d say in recent years, since around the time they started open sourcing ASP.NET a while back, they&#x27;ve been pretty decent.I mean, some people dislike Windows for various reasons, but this falls more into their development umbrella so I trust it is in good hands as ASP.NET, Xamarin, etc. have been in recent years.

The claim misunderstands how software is different from services, so it&#x27;s really a nonsensical statement. Also both Google and Microsoft distribute nonfree (proprietary, user-subjugating) software and spy on their users activities.The freedom of free software one runs on their own computer means it doesn&#x27;t matter who holds the copyright to the software. If the copyright holder does something you don&#x27;t like you have a copy you are free to run, inspect, modify, and share.Remotely hosted services are a different consideration than free software (see <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;philosophy&#x2F;network-services-arent-free-o...</a> for more). With remotely hosted services the user doesn&#x27;t typically have a copy of the service software. So free software concerns are for the service provider. We hope the service provider runs only free software for their own sake, they deserve to control their own computers just as we deserve to control our computers.In the particular case of free software and discussions you will publish publicly, you should consider <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;repo-criteria-evaluation.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;repo-criteria-evaluation.html</a> -- the GNU Project&#x27;s ethical repo criteria. This was written well before Microsoft was known to have any interest in buying GitHub, possibly during the time when Microsoft was chastising &quot;open source&quot; software for existing (and still despising strongly-copylefted free software) and before their current &quot;Microsoft [heart] open source&quot; publicity campaign. Thus there&#x27;s no chance GitHub&#x27;s failing evaluation is based any ad hominem such as whether Google is somehow scarier than Microsoft.

It&#x27;s not exactly about distrust, it&#x27;s just clash of interests. Microsoft is literally personification of Closed-source software, them acquiring GitHub is surely an evil plan to take control over the open source area.

I distrust Google far more than I distrust Microsoft, I generally don&#x27;t know why people see it otherwise, maybe it&#x27;s simply because when they were surfing Slashdot in 2003 everyone told them to hate Microsoft and in their heart Google is still the &quot;good guy.&quot; Imo, the roles have reversed.

&gt; I hear it&#x27;s terribly slowOn our self-hosted instance it flies.Using all of gitlab.com, our self-hosted instance, and github.com with some kind of regularity, I find both GH.com and GL.com equally fast (or &quot;slow&quot; depending on your PoV) since a year or so, and our local instance faster. Neither is rocket fast, but neither is &quot;terribly slow&quot; either, and at any rate they&#x27;re largely in the same ballpark.

I don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s slow, but it is hungry, don&#x27;t expect to run it on a Raspberry Pi or equivalent VM. Personally I think it&#x27;s a fair tradeoff considering we use it fully (including CI, etc).

Not me. Microsoft has fair products for sale whereas Google just takes a run with your data. I will avoid either if possible, but trying to imagine both scenarios, I think I&#x27;d consider my options just as much with either news. (I&#x27;ll probably move to Gitlab, self hosted if possible but I hear it&#x27;s terribly slow.)

I distrust Google more with privacy. I distrust Microsoft more with 1) not running newly acquired services into the ground, 2) not integrating it into their ecosystem until it&#x27;s unusable from the outside, and 3) yes, with free software. This is still the company whose founder, Gates, and its former CEO, Ballmer, wanted to rid the world of free sofware. Yes, there&#x27;s now a new CEO, but you can&#x27;t tell me that this culture was at the top of the company for decades and then swapping out one person suddenly switches everything around.

Admit it. If Google bought them instead, there&#x27;d be far less freakout. Google is pretty scary, but you have to admit that we still distrust MS with our free software even less.

I&#x27;m having pages take 15-20 seconds to load for me, personally.

Source on gitlab crashing? I&#x27;m using it right now and it&#x27;s fine other than the monitoring page getting resized right now due to very unusual load.

IDK about bitbucket, maybe it&#x27;s just me, but the page loads are like watching paint dry. So slow.Don&#x27;t get me started on their redesign, making everything blue doesn&#x27;t magically make it usable. Code review using -u style diffs?! With huge embedded comment slabs! What were you thinking? After three comments, even a small function doesn&#x27;t even fit one one page, absolutely painful and almost impossible to read the code.It&#x27;s not like it&#x27;s very hard to do a visual diff, it has been done zillions of times. Heck I implemented a partial &#x27;visual&#x27; diff in SQL once, should be easier than that when using a proper programming language.

Sorry about that. The link from this discussion is to our public monitoring site (separate from GitLab.com). GitLab.com itself it online and the monitoring dashboard is working again, too.

I don&#x27;t know about you, but every other day or so I receive bitbucket status alerts about some part of it not working properly.

Meanwhile GitLab is crashing... but Bitbucket is up. If you haven&#x27;t used it in a while, probably worth another look. It&#x27;s gotten a lot nicer in the last few years, and the code review and CI features are especially good.

I am wondering how many people are willing to rip their octocat stickers off their shiny new mac books ...

My first thought when the MSFT&#x2F;GitHub news broke was, &quot;This is great news for GitLab.&quot;

Sorry about that. We had to scale our monitoring dashboard a bit. It&#x27;s back up at the moment. GitLab.com is separate infrastructure, though, and we hope it remains online despite the added traffic :)

seems this thread has taken them down with 502 error :(

I&#x27;m not debating rights here, I&#x27;m saying I don&#x27;t know how to contact another user with zero activity on the platform.

That other person has just as much right to that nick as you do.

You can try talking to Gitlab support. I&#x27;ve found Github to release squatted usernames, so that might be the case with Gitlab too.Remember, however, all that their activity need not public. They could have a massive organisation with tons of active private repos.Still, doesn&#x27;t hurt to ask.

I&#x27;d like to move over to Gitlab, but someone else has been sitting on my nick, &quot;labster&quot;, for over two years with an empty group.  I&#x27;m labster on HN, Github, IRC, forums, etc. but have no way of even contacting the other person to ask for the name.  So for now, it looks like I&#x27;m stuck on Github.

&gt; it&#x27;s a very simple system to install &amp; update, uses all the same LAMP stack everyone is used toI think that has not been true for a while now. Maybe it&#x27;s just the world i live in, but putting a bunch of files into a directory on a vanilla LAMP configuration as a deployment scenario is not something i encounter a lot nowadays.edit: specifically referring to the &quot;everyone is used to&quot; part.

PHP applications are extremely easy to install and keep running, and Phabricator is probably the cream of the crop in terms of code quality. The devs have done an incredible job with it.So the answer is &quot;it can be&quot; considered a positive thing.

Well, there&#x27;s nothing wrong with using PHP, and the performance is often better than with other comparable options. Personally I really enjoy PHP 7.If you&#x27;re way out of the loop then all you need to know is that PHP 7 is quite awesome.

&gt; but biggest part of all, its PHP based, written to a very high standard through &amp; throughWhat?! Holy shit. Is that considered a positive thing these days?! I must be quite out of the damn loop.

Batch editing a hundred tasks pops up a progress bar where you can watch it happen. I&#x27;m no MySQL fan but InnoDB shouldn&#x27;t be that slow.

Cons:- The UI is lacking, esp. when viewing large diffs, compared to GitHub, VSTS-git, etc.- `arc` CLI is awful

&gt; its PHP based, written to a very high standard through &amp; throughI read small parts of the source code and it doesn&#x27;t adhere to any of the modern standards set by the PHP community.

Did you use a script like this one? <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gist.github.com&#x2F;JosephKu&#x2F;7a151e737c0a2de3eb3a6ec3c262fa9a" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gist.github.com&#x2F;JosephKu&#x2F;7a151e737c0a2de3eb3a6ec3c26...</a> that is mostly what I do. Works flawlessly for me every time.

GNOME turned down Phabricator in favour of GitLab partially because it is not easy to upgrade.My own company is moving to GitLab - attempts to upgrade Phabricator have failed:`git pull` is not a modern upgrade strategy - it ought to have an RPM.

I highly recommend people consider self-hosting with phabricator. It&#x27;s php-based, and if you have a ESXi or proxmox or digital ocean &#x2F; linode instance, it&#x27;s a very simple system to install &amp; update, uses all the same LAMP stack everyone is used to, supports ssh&#x2F;http based push&#x2F;pull workflows, git,svn,mecurial repos, same type of authentication as github&#x2F;gitlab&#x2F;bitbucket, but biggest part of all, its PHP based, written to a very high standard through &amp; through. Has the ability to scale insane amount of workers &amp; cluster configurations. I&#x27;ve never had it once hiccup on me. Yes, if you import a project with hundred thousand+ commits, it will take a while to import, because it builds records for the entire commit history of the repo, it doesn&#x27;t generate them the moment you view. So this will take time to back populate into the phabricator system, but once you have an imported repo, it has event system that is unlike any you may have ever used. It takes some time to get used to it, but organizations like CircleCI have a tutorial on how to integrate simple CI workflow using Harbomaster. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;circleci.com&#x2F;docs&#x2F;1.0&#x2F;phabricator&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;circleci.com&#x2F;docs&#x2F;1.0&#x2F;phabricator&#x2F;</a> Also as of php7.x phabricator runs even faster than ever before. It also has it&#x27;s own Trello Board style system, and it has a much more powerful issue system than gitlab&#x2F;github. Tickets can have parent&#x2F;children, and repos never specifically belong to any one project, but rather projects can have many repos. It also has integration with 2FA. It has a Question &amp; Answers section, wiki, pre-code-commit audits. Lot of really big open source communities use it. A fairly large list of big companies using it are shown on: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Phabricator" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Phabricator</a>

Fossil&#x27;s model is pretty nice in my book, though since it&#x27;s a much smaller community compared to other SCM options it has received far less polish overall. So, it has some awesome core ideas, but the implementation needs work to be competitive for most users.

I seriously wonder if Fossil&#x27;s model of keeping all issues in the clone isn&#x27;t the way to go - set up a public &quot;FossilHub&quot; or some such thing if it doesn&#x27;t already exist and then you get a local copy of everything, no worries about providers at all.

Sorry about that. We had to scale our monitoring dashboard a bit. It&#x27;s back up at the moment.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.github.com&#x2F;2010-11-15-today-s-outage&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.github.com&#x2F;2010-11-15-today-s-outage&#x2F;</a>

A few times during partial outages I noticed that some changes didn&#x27;t take place for real.

Had GitHub ever lost data?<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;www.theregister.co.uk&#x2F;AMP&#x2F;2017&#x2F;02&#x2F;01&#x2F;gitlab_data_loss&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;www.theregister.co.uk&#x2F;AMP&#x2F;2017&#x2F;...</a>

Or then I could just host it myself using their open tech and everything would be fine again. :)

Care to explain what? Satya Microsoft is day&#x2F;night different between Ballmer MIcrosoft.Meanwhile Sundar Pichai Google hasn’t been the friendliest.

Google has done a lot of shit before, but I sure as hell trust them more than Microsoft at the moment when it comes to acquisitions.

This. Thank you for pointing this out. Also I have a hard time trusting the &quot;community + proprietary&quot; model...

GitLab engineer here: our CEO has responded to exactly that concern in <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;sytses&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003415290368028672" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;sytses&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003415290368028672</a> and <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;sytses&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003337681668005888" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;sytses&#x2F;status&#x2F;1003337681668005888</a>. To quote:&gt; We&#x27;ll have a liquidity event. We&#x27;re aiming for an IPO <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;strategy&#x2F;#goals" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;strategy&#x2F;#goals</a> but we can&#x27;t rule out an acquisition.And it&#x27;s worth pointing out that you can run GitLab on your own server, so even if GitLab.com ever ends up disappointing you, you don&#x27;t need to go through the trouble of migrating to the next best thing.

They are actually advertising google cloud platform in self-hosted versions now:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.imgur.com&#x2F;OgrNMxn.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;i.imgur.com&#x2F;OgrNMxn.png</a>

I&#x27;d like to point out that GitLab is not independent. They are owned by investors, including Google Ventures. So anyone who thinks they&#x27;re giving GitHub&#x2F;MS the finger by migrating their repos, please be ready to move everything again when GitLab disappoints you.

This is pretty much par for course when it comes to GitLab marketing. Made up headlines that can&#x27;t be supported with facts.

I wonder if there are statistics on how much of that number is forks (which people use like clones) and how much of it totally abandoned or README only or empty repositories. And also which 3k repos are those is veeery important. Just a handful high-profile repos migrating can cause a much bigger wave.

The &quot;huge spike&quot; is currently at about 3k repos imported. Github had 67 million repos last year.

They&#x27;ve been trying to move to Google Cloud for months.

GitLab is hosted on K8s, azure probably worked out to be the cheapest solution. If azure of any competitor change their prices, you just move k8s config to another provider withing a few hours. In one company I worked in this process was configured as jenkins job, just click on new job and it was migrating between azure, gcp, aws and ibm.

- GitLab is hosted on Azure- Google will acquire GitLab within a year

There is <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;searchcode.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;searchcode.com</a> which searches over public repos from all the big providers.

&gt; github is still the only one providing a search engine over billions of lines of modern codeI&#x27;m happy with Github, but I&#x27;ve always found the search to be so unhelpful that it&#x27;s like they don&#x27;t even have the feature.

It’s cool that there are alternatives, but github is still the only one providing a search engine over billions of lines of modern code. It’s an irreplaceable software development tool and I hope Microsoft treats it well.

Seems like a knee-jerk reaction. In reality it will probably be more than a year before anyone even notices any change to GitHub associated with the acquisition.

Sorry about that. We had to scale our monitoring dashboard due to increase in traffic.

&gt;If you want nice things, you have to pay for them.Why the hell do I have to pay for something that has already been offered for free? That&#x27;s called bait and switch. And maybe this is a stretch, but I think that should not even be legal. In my mind it it is a form of false advertising. If you don&#x27;t think it will sustain itself as a free service in the future then don&#x27;t offer it as a free service in the first place.

I’ve been using the keybase.io git repos. It’s cool that it adds encryption. Unfortunately there’s no pull request system so it falls short on teams that depend on that.

I really like how the devs from gitlab are active on the HN thread and replying to people facing problems! Hardly see that with mature products anymore! Great going guys!

Sorry about that. Was the 503 on GitLab.com (main application) or on the link in this discussion (monitor.gitlab.net)? The latter is to a public monitoring dashboard. It has been offline a couple of times today due to influx of traffic. We&#x27;re closely monitoring it and attempting to keep it online. At the moment, GitLab.com itself has been absorbing the additional load, though. Let us know if you&#x27;re seeing other issues.

GitLab is so overloaded right now that the ngnix server is returning 503 Bad Gateway. Do they have the capacity to handle all the projects being moved over from Github?We&#x27;ve had to do this before. Remember when Sourceforge tried putting adware into open source downloads? Many projects left Sourceforge then. That was tougher. Github to Gitlab is easy.Microsoft has put adware and spyware in their operating system. We have to expect that they may try something like that with Github. They may say they won&#x27;t, but that&#x27;s non-binding and meaningless.

Could you please not post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html</a>

Thanks for your concern. Everything on <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;monitor.gitlab.net" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;monitor.gitlab.net</a> is for public consumption. We&#x27;re very transparent :)

Did you guys also mean to make all the other Grafana dashboards public? Just wanted to let you guys know in case there&#x27;s something sensitive in there.

I&#x27;m not surprised.You know that feeling when someone makes a service you really enjoy and you know you can trust? GitLab is definetly one of those services.Self hosted? Check! 
Open source? Check! 
Community Edition that include the features small-medium teams need? Check!I&#x27;m a huge fan of GitLab, and with the current business model and how community editions work I&#x27;ll definetly continue promoting GitLab every chance I get.Keep up the good work! :)

GNOME did not migrate From Github, but from a bunch of other tools.Also, they are not using the GitLab.com instance, but have set up their own.

I certainly hope not. GitHub&#x27;s purchase has not even been officially announced by Microsoft. I wouldn&#x27;t trust a project that hurriedly uprooted their repo to move to the flavor of the day. Projects need stability and also need level-headed admins that contribute to that stability.GitHub hosts open source projects for free and have so for a long time. What other reason should an OSS project move to another hosting platform, other than &quot;ugh, Microsoft bad&quot;?

Well, you don&#x27;t think a big decision like this would be made within a few hours in a large, community driven project, would they?

Did any big FOSS project move to GitLab from GitHub today or is planning to move?

This is great and all, but I suspect in a year most modules, gems, etc will still be hosted on Github. So shake your fist and proclaim your distrust for Microsoft, but most developers will still have Github as a core dependency of their livelihood.

You are right, racial is not what I was trying to say.

Most of that is a valid complaint.  The last sentence is nonsense.  Github is not doing this for racial reasons, and I can&#x27;t even picture how political correctness could possibly be involved for gitlab.  (And when political correctness is a motivation to do something, that&#x27;s a bad thing, because it means it&#x27;s not a genuine action.)

I am very happy with the constant innovation that GitLab is offering. They have data centers avross the globe and were the first to run a DC in Asia. FYI GitHub still does not have a DC in Asia and UP&#x2F;DOWN speeds are terrible. GH refuses to add DC in Asia for unknown reasons despite my many requests. One will think that we are in a cold war or something where most companies support only US and many years later try to expand. Remember this next time when you travel abroad and see how polite and welcoming other nations are. Software service must be the same way. Thank you for being politically correct GitLab and shame on you GitHub for being racist

This is analogous to spike in Canadian citizenship requests after DT became president :-)

... until the day arrives when a huge company buys out GitLab.Hosting your precious code is always an issue, and doing it yourself with something like <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitea.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitea.io&#x2F;</a> is cheaper than Github etc. on a small VPS or even a RPI at home.

does it count scheduled imports or completed ones?

Can you elaborate? Among the giants (Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft), I’d like to think Microsoft is the 4th on the least trustworthy scale - right ahead of Apple, and behind the other three.

We hate it even more after recent changes on LinkedIn.

And windows really went downhill after 7.

The largest part of their strategy and goals that is the same is &quot;make money&quot;. But to say there is no improvement or that it&#x27;s even worse is just silly. There is little to no hostility anymore to open-source, and they&#x27;re contributing quite a bit...

Well, for me this new Microsoft is even worse than Ballmer&#x27;s Microsoft. Because their strategy and goals are the same, but they changed their PR to make people think otherwise.

Yeah -- that is a bummer. It may have been acceptable if the OS were free, but not when you paid the full price for the license.

As long as I&#x27;m still greeted by Candy Crush  im my start menu after every forced update, I will not consider their products tools for serious workflow!

Wow! Did not realise people hate&#x2F;distrust Microsoft so much! Balmer’s Microsoft - sure, but I thought that under the current administration,  they were seen as a lot more friendly company.

GitLab sees huge spike in project imports