It also has an awesome automatic mirror mode that can remain sync'd to a remkte repository. I don't care what your company does or how you run it, but please don't just rely on Github to host your code without a mirror somewhere. There are drawbacks to this incessant centralization.
Instead of Gogs it is now recommended to use Gitea, since it has more activity (~400 more commits last time I checked) and is community driven: https://gitea.io/
According to their Blog: Gitea is a community fork of the popular self-hosted Git service Gogs. We’re a growing group of former Gogs users and contributors who found the single-maintainer management model of Gogs frustrating and thus decided to make an effort to build a more open and faster development model.https://blog.gitea.io/2016/12/welcome-to-gitea/
Just this week I setup gogs on my VPS to mirror all of my repos on github. It's part of my new year goal to avoid my dependence on 3rd party apps. Of course I still am depending on my VPS provider so...
The nice thing about git is that it's distributed. You can place as many mirrors as you like. If you make the project and repo names the exact same as the official ones, then switching between them can be as easy as replacing a hostname in your dependency manager.
The specs for a beaglebone black are worse than a raspberry pi 3 in every way except the eMMC storage. Am I missing something? (I've actually been looking for something stronger to include in my raspberry pi cluster at home, but this doesnt seem like it)
One solution to that problem is to run your own local git server, with an automatic process for pulling github repositories of the dependencies you need. Then you can always know that you will have the access to our dependencies even with a third party is unavailable.
I think the point was that you don't want to be messing with production when people are going to be gone for days. Even if it's easy to roll back I'd just as soon not deal with it. If your application is of such importance that rolling a change out Friday v. Monday makes a different in the business's bottom line, that business can almost certainly afford to have weekend staff that could cover it.
I've configured one remote with two pushurls and set this remote to all my branches.
This way I always push to BitBucket and GitHub at the same time. Just wondering, how this would work if I was not the single user contributing.
You'd have to either coordinate with the other users to have them do the same, or officially declare which one is "official" and which one is "backup" and set up something so the backup tracks the official (and then you only need to push to the official as well)
Only work around is to create a README on empty repos via the GUI and which then opens up the Protected Branches page. That said the rules around who is able to commit on the repos are broken.
Hey there, thanks for bringing this up. First, I want to apologize for the inconvenience you've experienced as a result of this issue. Second, I'd like to apologize for the delay in getting back to you on this as well.
You're right, 3+ weeks is a pretty long time for something like this to be affecting people. Unfortunately I don't have an ETA on when this issue will be resolved, but I'll be keeping tabs on it going forward. Please feel free to add additional comments to the issues if you haven't already, or you can reach out to me directly. Again, I'd like to apologize for any trouble this caused you and others affected by this issue.
Gitlab can go down. Gitlab might have outages as well unless you are using the self-hosted version (although, in this case there is a self-hosted version of Github as well).
Just because Gitlab is not as famous as Github and hackers don't run their botnets on it, it doesn't mean it is safe or stable.
I'm envisioning some kind of caching forward proxy for git. Point your clones/fetches at it and it will proxy the connection to the source fork. If the source fork is down, it will serve its cached copy of the fork.
I found this[0] but it's prerelease and looks like it hasn't been touched in five years. Anyone know of any other solutions like this? Good idea? Bad idea?
GitHub adds value. They have a few engineering issues to solve given the negative attention such a popular code versioning system attracts. Although there are some outages due to this condition, the value added to our organization far outweighs these minor inconveniences.
Been working on a down detector type app, its like half baked at the mo, hopefully I can build up a data set that allows people to fairly compare the reliability of different SASS products such as github and bitbucket
So there was an outage yesterday which required failover to another data center. Wonder if both are related. Either way I want to read their postmortem. GitHub's postmortem is usually very educational.
I use JSPM on my projects and I have several dependencies on github repos that aren't in NPM. Anyone have any ideas on a fallback solution for when github goes out like this?
Have a local git server, with an automatic process for pulling in the repositories that are your dependencies. Then use the repos from that local git server instead of github directly.
Github has been down (or very slow) a lot the last few months. They used to have a good engineering reputation (at least with me), but it's been tough times over there.
