GitLab 7.8 release
about.gitlab.com
about.gitlab.com
It seems like ultimately, versioning software will need to grow to understand more file types than text in order to keep track of changes to many large files. I imagine Git plugins available by filetype and perhaps automatically sourced by Gitlab when needed, but I know that would be an enormous task.
Unrelated: can you possibly work with Atlassian to get Gitlab integration for SourceTree? It would be very convenient for us. :)
We would love to see better support for GitLab in SourceTree and so would many others https://answers.atlassian.com/questions/47020/comments/26160... The response from Atlassian in that thread indicates they are less inclined to do it. Since GitLab is an open source alternative for their Stash+JIRA+Confluence+Bamboo products I understand their stance on this. Of course it never hurts to ask in that thread.
https://github.com/bup/bup strategically breaks files to chunks of ~8k length, in a way that makes small changes to a big file become a small change to a small number of chunks (ideally, changing one byte in a 80GB file would change exactly one such 8KB chunk -- and that is often the case, though it's common than 3 or 4 would change).
bup then puts[0] the chunks into git, together with a "reconstruction map". As a result, you can efficiently put huge files in git and only pay for the real deltas in storage.
[0] It doesn't actually use git or libgit - it writes git packs directly.
I really like git annex since the repository is still completely git compatible.
I agree git-annex is the best solution for now - I just wish some effort would go into versioning binary files by creating projects that mimic the behavior of the programs that generate them in some way.
Probably the closest thing to what I am optimistically hoping to see someday is how developers save DB migration files instead of versioning copies of the database tables, and then run the migrations as part of the merge process to sync the databases.
Thinking about it more, it seems like a general project to create 'migration' specifications to generate binary files would be more appropriate than a project to modify version control.
Anyway, thanks for your work on Gitlab!
I agree that it would be nice to have more files being created algorithmically instead of being binary. You can diff an svg image but you can't diff a jpeg. Although the svg diff could be presented better than how we currently do it.
And you're welcome, more than 700 contributors made GitLab what it is today.
Read about it here: https://blog.sandstorm.io/news/2015-01-21-gitweb-and-gitlab....
My only little problem is that now the list of merge request display the assignee instead of the creator. It does not really make sense to me as there's already the filter "assigned to me". It breaks a little my workflow because I do code reviewing for a dozen of person across several project, and when they tell me on skype "pushed" , now i need to ask them "errrr which MR number?"
EDIT: I would have nothing against a middle ground of displaying both.
thanks for your quick feedback.
I don't know ruby at all, but I guess I can try, as you're the one who made the change to put assignee instead of author, I would not be against some guidance on where to look for the modification :)
in my naive understanding, in order to implement the feature as you said, it would require from the controller to send to the view a variable "isFilteredByAssignee"
How can one find the corresponding controller, I've tried grepping for _merge_request.html.haml or just _merge_request without finding anything.
I guess the index.html.haml in the folder do something magic to render the list of merge_request with the @merge_requests ?
#337 assigned to Sytse Sijbrandij => #337 by AVATAR assigned to AVATAR Sytse Sijbrandij
When you hover over the avatar it should show the name of the author in a tooltip.
If you don't feel comfortable making this please make it into a feature request on http://feedback.gitlab.com/forums/176466-general
Thanks again for the time you took to answer me
Shouldn't GitLab.com cost something, and its revenue will be used to support the hosting as well as building a sustainable business model? The idea is for those who want to own their data or the fear of vendor lock in they could use the Community version.
The current offering looks like those Free Webhosting long time ago that offers unlimited bandwidth and webspace.
We think that repository hosting will be like email hosting. Most people will have an account for free with only forum support (similar to gmail and outlook.com). For the next few years we expect the on-premises subscriptions to bring in more than enough money to pay for hosting. Because code hosting is a central hub for many services we think that long term revenue model will be a marketplace for additional services.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
We have a team and by default all the members of the team have read access to all the team repositories (unless overridden at a repo level) and write access to the repositories they created or forked. Developers can create forks within the team namespace and send pull requests between themselves and to the official "blessed" repo from which releases are done. Those with write access to some repositories can commit to those repos and also merge pull requests. Admin can basically do everything within the team namespace.
That said, congratulations on keeping GitLab rolling forward with more and more features and bugfixes every release.
Edit: Fixed a typo and added some more detail.
Internally, you can create the /path/to/v3/ part using either a snapshot-capable filesystem with periodic snaps (in which case v3 might become a datetime string in yyyymmdd type format) or a script that creates incrementing version numbers of symlinks to the same when filesystem contents change -- using inotify() or similar.
It's a really solid project using great technology that's easy to support and use!
It's great to have a community of people using and building GitLab, that contributes new features, critizes decisions and helps everyone else stay sharp.
I suppose though, if you are running your own Git repos then you probably want to run your own CI.
Gitlab also offers CI but we are a Node shop so I stuck with what I could modify best. That being said I've been able to modify and contribute to Gitlab easily over the years.
Great job Gitlab team! I'm so glad to see the remote team and open model succeed so well.
The alternative to Gitlab that I've found on windows are a bit lacking. Bonobo is nice but very basic.
Starting a VM is easier than ever nowadays and installing GitLab no harder.
I'm so comfortable saying this, that if you have any problems getting it setup, email me at job [at] gitlab dot com and I'll help you get rolling.