Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:45:53 -0700 From: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@FreeBSD.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-git@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Installing Gitlab on FreeBSD Message-ID: <CAG=rPVf1rzF40vjfCQ5tuq6LDHi%2BbAk%2BBPQ0nVc1YqAWMhmGMQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <550A561D.4030109@freebsd.org> References: <CAG=rPVfFbSM=PQdt7J5rxu%2BAcOuG0Fa8-mUGtLPNrA=UP=qgzA@mail.gmail.com> <550A561D.4030109@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > We use it here at Norse on FreeBSD. Had some issues with earlier > versions. Our current deploy had some issues with process limits and > timeouts associated with the gargantuan size of the FreeBSD ports and src > repos. > > We were able to fix this by increasing a bunch of timeouts. I can ask our > ops lead about it to get some information. > Can you get your ops ninja to post any tips/tricks to this thread which I created: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/howto-install-gitlab-on-freebsd.50920/ I want there to be more info for how to run Gitlab on FreeBSD, since a lot of the existing docs are very Linux-centric. In your experience at Norse, how does Gitlab compare against Github? Is it better, worse, or mostly the same? How good is the Gitlab project at fixing things and being responsive to feedback? What I am beginning to realize is that if you compare an individual feature of Github, like wiki, bug tracker, code review, there are better alternatives for each component, i.e. better wiki, better bug tracker, better code review tool. However, the value of Github is that everything is integrated. So, when I do a pull request on Github, and then commit, everything is integrated and linked. For FreeBSD, we have chosen nice tools, like Bugzilla (bug tracker), Phabricator (code review), MoinMoin (wiki) Subversion (code repository). Each of these things works nicely on its own, but to tie all those things together into a modern development environment requires a lot of work. There seem to be a few enthusiastic volunteers who are tying this together to make things work, but we definitely have rough edges. I'm wondering if the FreeBSD project would be better off going with one of these integrated solutions. I understand that the FreeBSD project likes to be independent and run its own infrastructure, but that is a lot of work, and I think we are missing out on a lot of innovation happening in other software projects that are taking care of all this stuff. -- Craig
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAG=rPVf1rzF40vjfCQ5tuq6LDHi%2BbAk%2BBPQ0nVc1YqAWMhmGMQ>