Kallithea – A free software source code management system
kallithea-scm.org
kallithea-scm.org
I'm a Java-guy myself so using GitBucket saves time. All of the VM/compiler requirements for building& hosting it are already on all of my servers. It also adds a safety net for myself: if I find a bug, I can fix it myself without too much hard work. It's just extremely convenient for my use cases.
I've heard nothing but praise for Gogs, so I definitely want to give it a..... go some time. (I'm sorry, needed to make that pun).
Edit: Fixed spelling.
[0]: https://hglabhq.com
At least they are quite upfront about the issues, and IMHO I'd rather see this kind of thing in a 0.1 version than a 1.0
If you're not thinking in those terms, the argument you're replying to might seem irrelevant, or even in favor of Gitlab, if eg you prefer a permissive license or the software you use to have a profitable business behind it. Maybe that's where you're coming from?
don't worry, they are just meaning us (the RhodeCode company which was co-founded by Marcin, the creator of RhodeCode, and me).
The Kallithea project members have their own thoughts how professional enterprise software should be developed, tested and maintained for a massive scale and they do not think that a company or full-time employees should be involved.
They forked our old 1.7.2 version from 2 year ago.
It is good that successful open source projects are forked, it increases diversity and choice for all the different user segments and generally drives innovation forward.
RhodeCode Enterprise 3, https://rhodecode.com, is a significant improvement to our old forked versions (in terms of performance, security, workflows and VCS support) and the user can select now if he wants to go more for a hobby open source fork project or a commercially backed, professional software product like Gitlab or RhodeCode.
I wish all the best to the Kallithea folks even if it seems that their focus lays more on talking about why the project exists instead of working in the project itself and it is interesting to see how strongly the development paths already diverged.
Best,
Sebastian
while you are bashing this project because of too much talk, I had a look at the Rhodecode site and couldn't really gather any information about the project at all. Maybe I'm dense, but as far as I can see
- there is no description of supported workflows (branch/commit/patch-based, how do you track rebases/force pushes, etc.)
- there is no link to actual documentation
- there is no demo
- and worst of all: your "Pricing" section does not mention any actual prices.
I know I can directly download your software and try myself, but this is something I only do when I'm confident your software could at least theoretically work for our setup and is also affordable.
> They forked our old 1.7.2 version from 2 year ago.
You skipped to mention license violation claims: https://lwn.net/Articles/609709/
I know of datomic, but it has time as a dimension - EAVT. Would be interesting in some cases - financial data, content creation - to have both, the querying ability of databases as well as git style branching/merging.
So for example
blob = { id: 1, meta: { type: "paragraph" }}
// so you can query by meta.type
version1 = { content: "This is a example" }
version2 = { content: "This is an example" }
db.commit("master", blob.id, version1)
db.get("master", blob.id)
// { content: "This is a example" }
db.commit("master", blob.id, version2)
db.get("master", blob.id)
// { content: "This is an example" } git,hg...fossil
no issue tracking...distributed issue tracking
python...c
gplv3...2 clause BSD