cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/67880752
Hi, I want to self host a git service to display my work (electronics) for some recruiters. Which platform is the best? I’ve heard about Gitlab, Gitea and Forgejo. For me the fact that the platform doesn’t run some background analytics and does not sell my data is very important.
I’d say Forgejo as it is the most simple of the three. If you want more complexity (like CI/CD), then one of the other two. You can checkout Forgejo at codeberg.org.
Gitea is not fundamentally different than Forgejo, Forgejo is just a better fork of it. Better in terms of: more contributors, more users, dogfooding (Gitea is built on Github 🤦).
But yes, GitLab is like the Mac of Git forges: everything is included, doing everything their own way, vendor lock, very expensive. There is a community edition but serious users will run into its limitations and it does not integrate neatly with external solutions.
Forgejo is IMO the Linux of Git forges: low on resources, expandable, hackable, stable.
We should also keep in mind that Gitea was hostilely taken away from the community by a for-profit corporation that made Gitea open-core by hiding a way features behind a paywall in a cloud.
FUD
Gitea is still MIT licensed and the Enterprise tier features only cater to large org needs [1]. Why would I want to deal with nightmarish SAML config when OIDC does a better job
Forgejo was forked because the maintainers were butthurt they didn’t have more say in the development roadmap and their large PRs didn’t get reviewed and merged fast enough. Which is a valid reason to fork
FACT
The corporation basically stole the project from the community and started hiding features behind a paywall.
It is completely irrelevant if you need the features that are closed and behind a paywall and are not part of the open core.
No true Scot, then?
I’m running gitlab implementations at a few sites. I’ve not seen or heard of any performance limiter with a self-managed community edition that removes a tool the others still provide.
Again, this sounds FUDdy. Which ‘external solutions’ are you using that a git-push fails on? Some spaghetti of saas tendrils seems to be already a risk, but I can’t think of any other external thing that it could mess up with.
Eh, there’s not really a better/worse between Gitea and ForgeJo. Gitea is targeting business customers, ForgeJo is targeting the open source community.
CI/CD works fine for selfhosted forgejo, I set mine up with minimal hassle.
Is the CI/CD still a faithful clone of github’s worst-in-show setup? Because if I had a plan for ditching GL, the CI keeps forgejo from being a contender.
Sure, but it’s not part of Forgejo, is it?
Yes it is? Check the docs
I guess it depends on how you look at it - “It needs to be installed separately.”
You left out a part of the sentence;
And:
So yeah. it depends on how you look at it. For me it means it’s part of Forgejo.
Github actions also needs a separate runner, github just provides some free ones for you. You can self-host a github actions runner as well.
Thanks for you reply, I did not know what CI/CD mean so just checked it, it’s not important for me because I want to display only finished project. Forgejo looks great and I just found it’s available as a TrueNas app which is great for me.
I’ve been running forgejo (and forgejo-runner for workflows) on TrueNAS for a little while now, without any issues really.
The runner image is also available as a TrueNAS app, so if you ever do want CI/CD it’s pretty simple to set up.