Hacker News Reader

Comment by freedomben | Hacker News Reader

I get that this is sarcasm, but Gitlab is a lot more than just version control. CI/CD, project management, even hosting (Gitlab pages).

But even for just version control for most use cases you need some common remote for people to push and pull to. Even a bare git setup has the potential of going down and putting people in the exact same boat that they are in now (they can commit locally, but can't push).

View on HN

I know it is, which imo is the problem. You shouldn’t have to rely on an additional third-party for your company to be able to commit, checkout, build, and deploy code.

All these startups who experience a 100% dev outage when github or gitlab go down are fundamentally broken.

> All these startups who experience a 100% dev outage when github or gitlab go down are fundamentally broken.

On this I totally agree. Although if you have deploys fully automated and gated behind CI/CD checks (which in many cases is required for compliance), how do you structure things such that a total outage of the CI/CD platform doesn't knock the dev cycle?

A gitlab outage is like a snow day for devs. Welp can’t do anything, see you guys back tomorrow.

There is the git send-email & co. I understand the extreme convenience of things like github and gitlab but as everything moves onto them it does seem we are becoming really dependent on a few sites.

Have you tried to run your own mail infrastructure in 2023? It's a nightmare from all the junk mail handling schemes of every individual email provider to just dealing with antiquated software for the mailing list and mailer daemons.

I'm not sure why you think you would need to "run your own mail infrastructure" to use git send-email, but you don't.

And yet you can host your own Gitlab instance, so...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com