OneUptime is an open-source Datadog alternative

That's quite a lot of required fields to sign up: why would they require my phone number, first name, last name, company name, and email? They require so much PII just so I could try things out on a project whose commit history looks like this [0].

Maybe I'm too paranoid but I'm somewhat annoyed I have to give up everything except my SSN to try some new SaaS and then risk getting harassed by email, by phone, and god knows how.

[0] https://github.com/OneUptime/oneuptime/commits/master?after=...

Note that “Datadog alternative” doesn’t appear in the readme, also without a metrics component is could hardly be considered a datadog alternative. Most of the features seem to be coming soon. Interesting nonetheless.

It seems a stretch to call it a DD alternative when all the hard, and most important, bits are coming soon.

That's a lot of promises around the features coming soon... where the comparable features coming soon are otherwise achieved by whole projects which evolved over years. Unless they reuse an existing logs solution for example, I think they may be really underestimating the scope here. (Especially given close to 1 serious contributor to the repo over the last half a year)

Also, while checking out their page - you can't just slap a cookie banner on the website where "deny" sends you to Google and say you're GDPR compliant. GDPR explicitly says you need to provide the service anyway if the customer opts out of data sharing.

As a european, there is no way I would host anything remotely critical with a company who cannot even create a compliant cookie consent banner (clicking deny sends you to google.com...)

The post title is inaccurate. The linked repo makes no mention at all of Datadog. And as far as I can tell, it doesn't position itself as a Datadog competitor either.

The setup for your machine is just a dev build. It's not something published and released on dockerhub.

oooh... online free offering looks great. same for selfhosting

Also, what's up with the terrible commit messages? That alone makes me doubt the quality of this project.

> fix

> fix lint

> fix lint,

> fix lint.

> fix docker file

> fix bug

> fix docker-compose

Is your software test process so poor that you can't even ensure a single commit passes all checks? This almost feels like developers are pushing whatever they want with no QA, and if it breaks the build, just push up more commits until checks pass??