Hacker News Reader

Comment by mercurial | Hacker News Reader

It's not quite a "github clone" in the sense that it's supposed to be self-hosted. It would make it more of a trac/redmine concurrent, depending on how much work has gone into the wiki and project management part. Is anyone actually using it?

And ironically, the source code is hosted on github.

View on HN

You can also get Gitlab as a service on http://gitlab.com

I started Gitlab.com last month and we already have more than 250 people who have created an account.

Many companies are already using Gitlab behind their firewall: Phusion, Thomson Reuters, Michigan State University, see the bottom of the Gitlab.org front page for more.

The fact that the source code is on Github is ironic, we need public repo's to change it: http://gitlab.uservoice.com/forums/176466-general/suggestion...

Just out of curiosity, are you a core contributor to the gitlab project? Or did you build a SaaS around the existing OSS work that had been done?

I'm not a core contributor, we're building on the work that was already done. However, we are working fulltime on this and we work in the open and are sending all our work upstream. So we hope to become core contributors and help the Gitlab project flourish. Read more on http://blog.gitlab.com/contributions/

There're a lot of people who don't want to use GitHub for whatever privacy policy.

If you consider using Gitlab as a in-house self-hosted "GitHub-feature like" alternative, Gitlab is really good! We use it for our projects and it runs quite well.

https://enterprise.github.com

Your own private github.

We did a 45 day trial. To call it disappointing would be a vast understatement. Performance problems, no root access, no direct repository access, poor tooling (had to wait for support to write us a script). We were actually locked out of our repo with no recovery options for about 4 days before we gave up on Github support. I do love Github, just hate their "have your own" VM product, it is bad.

After that we tried Gitorious (back then it was still an unholy nightmare to install) before finally landing on Gitlab. Gitlab isn't perfect, sometimes the ruby process likes to eat gigs of memory and has to be restarted (we have very large repos)...

But Gitlab has a great trajectory, every release is a great step up and I find the multiple branches working mode more natural than the multiple repos method that github has...

Huh..we've had full root access since the beginning. (Github FI) Even across all of their releases. There's a place to drop your public key in.

Github support has been variable, but generally good for us. The switch to a VM was touchy at first, but once we gave it enough horsepower, things were fine.

https://support.enterprise.github.com/entries/21243936-ssh-a...

In order to preserve the integrity of the appliance and ensure that it remains in a consistent state, we have these limitations in place:

- Root access is not provided. - The admin user password is not provided. - Installation and execution of third party software is not permitted. - Modification of the underlying VM configuration is not permitted.

Bypassing any of these limitations will void all warranties and may put your installation in an unsupportable state.

Totally agree. We have about 500 devs on enterprise github (which is totally different than github:fi) and it is terrible. There have been so many issues including constant service failures that require reboot, missing / disabled features, poor ui choices that we are still cleaning up, the list goes on.

I still can't even limit access to it using an ldap group. If someone works for the company, then they can access it. Totally unacceptable for a product that licenses based on numbers of seats.

Disclaimer: I work for Atlassian

Atlassian Stash was released five months ago for Enterprise teams adopting Git behind the firewall. Stash is installed on your servers and gives you full control of your Git environment - security, user management (LDAP), infrastructure support and pull requests.

$5k is a lot of money for smaller companies. :)

Also: don't get me wrong, i love Github and what it's doing for our opensource culture, but like everything else, sometimes there're other requirements.

This costs money, GitLab does not. The benefit is obvious.

https://bitbucket.org/

Bitbucket suports Git, too. (not just Hg)

I'm using it right now. It's rather lightweight and is easy to setup on a low end VPS. The git-related code has features Bitbucket only just added: side by side diffs, comments at line number, activity log...

The issue tracker is rather basic (like Github) so you guessed correctly -- many people are using it alongside Redmine. I've created a simple patch and theme to tie the two together [1] - something that would be impossible with Github. Between the two it's had a significant positive impact on recent projects for both me and my clients. It's been much easier to grasp the current state of the project than using just gitk or a standard file browser or cli client. I expect to see many more Gitlab installations in the future. The ability to customize it for a need is invaluable.

[1] https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/issues/97#issuecomment-...

I've set up Gitlab at Northeastern University to explore it as an option for replacing our cgit install(s). I like the UI, but my only problem with it is that it doesn't support putting repos under a user namespace like Github does (with Gitlab, rails/rails and ali/rails can't exist on the same system). AFAIK there's no plan for Gitlab to support this, but it looks like Gitorious already does.

I'm the founder of Gitlab.com and this is very high on our list of priorities. All our code is open and we will try to merge the changes back into the main project. This functionality is the most upvoted item on our feedback site https://gitlab.uservoice.com/forums/176466-general/suggestio...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com