Just realized the weight of moving the primary location of our source code given the number of links to it out there

And the whole forks ecosystem

And the way commit messages refer to GitHub issue numbers


On the other hand, that's only going to get worse over time - even more links, even more forks, even more commit messages.

And maybe Microsoft won't fuck up GitHub, but sensing this vendor lockin now, what would happen if they do?

So it's probably a band-aid that has to be ripped sooner rather than later. 🤔

Got approved for a GitLab Ultimate license so that's sorted (although I haven't received it yet)

@valerauko It is self-hosted. It's a license for a self-hosted software.

@valerauko If it's on my domain and my hardware then what github-like argument can you make?

@Gargron FWIW, you can move the repo and turn GitHub into a mirror.

GNOME did it before moving to GitLab, and it did improve contributions. (The recent move to GitLab majorly improved collaboration even more — but that's because they had relatively antiquated systems that still needed to be used beore.)

But, basically, you can move and keep the project on GitHub as a mirror. If you do so, I'd suggest having prominent notice in the README and links to the main repo in the README & project URL.

Garrett LeSage

@Gargron GitLab has push mirroring for enterprise edition — does your Ultimate License also support it? docs.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/re

(Otherwise, a mirror can be just another git remote that is pushed to, and that can even be automated.)

@Gargron Oh, nice! GitLab's been moving more and more Enterprise things into CE. Great to hear!

I guess the docs just need updating (just like every software project, ever).

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Generalistic and moderated instance. All opinions are welcome, but hate speeches are prohibited. Users who don't respect rules will be silenced or suspended, depending on the violation severity.