> There hasn’t been a new Git repo launch in almost a decade,” Bansal told me. “Now you have GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket from Atlassian, but that’s really it
Seems odd that he wouldn’t know about Sourcehut (2018) and Gitea (2016).
Mind you I use (and thus pay for) Sourcehut: the vast majority of folks won't be cross shopping Sourcehut and GitHub. As it stands now the UX is (to put it charitably) bad. There's a lot to like, but overall Sourcehut is disjointed rather than cohesive. The workflow itself is also an acquired taste. With a bit of spit and polish Sourcehut could be quite nice to use, but it's not there yet. Hell, I bet Drew could pick up some of the UX folks that GitHub laid off.
The others mentioned are more or less knockoffs of GitHub, because at one point GitHub was quite worth emulating.
This is probably my fault. Internally at Harness I have been hyping this launch as a "once in a decade" event. That unfortunately got translated into "first in a decade" when it hit the press. I do think the launch of a new, major open source Source Control system with kind of investment (12 full time engineers and counting) is a rare event, but I do wish it was worded differently. Nothing we can do about it now!
I won't trust Harness with anything open source. It's the same company that killed the open source Drone CI after acquiring it. They changed the license such that you could contribute to it but could not use it if your revenue was more than 1 million USD. They didn't fix bugs that were well known to them because they were working on the enterprise version of it.
I may be wrong but I think that DroneCI did not change its license. Before you could use it for free if your revenue was less than 1 million USD which is what is now.
> That’s changing today with the launch of the Gitness open-source Git repository and the Harness Code Repository, the hosted and managed version of Gitness.
>> In addition, you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service without Conservancy's written permission. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision applies even to third-party marks that use the Marks as a syllable or as part of a portmanteau to refer to a product or service's use of Git code.
You might be right, but there are already many products out there that have been violating that trademark policy for quite some time, e.g. GitLab, GitKraken, SmartGit, ...
My guess is that Software Freedom Conservancy (a nonprofit) has more important things to do than go after those projects for trademark policy violations.
Gitness, an open-source GitHub competitor which hosts their open-source code...on GitHub... with a prominent call to arms on their landing page to star their repository...on GitHub...
If you don't even use your own product why should anyone else use it?
We have been using Gitness to develop Gitness for the last 6 months. We do mirror on GitHub as a backup. But we also want to meet the community where they exist today, which is GitHub.
I run the Gitness Project at Harness (also Founded Drone, on which this is based). It was mentioned by another Harness employee, but we have been dogfooding Gitness internally for the past 6 months. The project is entirely self-hosted at this point.
There was a lot of discussion internally about what message it would send if we also published the source code on GitHub. I was very adamant that we need to host on GitHub because this is where Open Source collaboration happens today, and we need to meet developers where they are today.
No shame here.
It is important to remember that Gitea is a very popular project and is a success by any measure with tens of thousands of installs, and they host on GitHub. I don't think that detracts from how awesome their product is. GitLab also hosted on GitHub in the early days to grow their community.
I definitely hope that one day, developers will love Gitness as much as they love GitHub, and they will choose Gitness to host their Open Source communities. But that will take a lot of time and a lot of work. We are here for it, but today is just a humble day 1 launch. We have years of work ahead of us.
How does this compare to e.g. Forgejo, Gitea, Gogs, self-hosted GitLab, or other alternatives?
Forgejo in particular has self-hosted actions runners that can be registered offline, and the runners themselves can be given labels and execute most existing GitHub actions (in fact, the yaml format they use is intentionally meant to be compatible with GitHub actions).
While the Pipelines UI looks nice, it hides all the very real details of deployment (and configuration) in a variety of environments. This is one thing Forgejo does well compared to e.g. Gitea for CI/CD, thanks to being very flexible in configuring runner secrets, registering runners, and so on. The runners themselves are also designed to run with rootless docker-in-docker. There is also the security aspect to consider. e.g. how does Pipelines prevent secrets from spilling in logs or people running bitcoin miners in CI? Does it offer a better level of security than Forgejo/Gitea here?
The reason I am emphasizing CI/CD is because hosting code and a bug tracker is only one small aspect of GitHub IMO. The real big things are its popularity and GitHub Actions. It's not enough for many people (and businesses) to simply host code anymore. Many now expect commits pushed to certain branches to execute a variety of workflows -- from unit tests to full-on Kubernetes deployments.
Thye aren't really competing with GitHub, which is more of consumer tool, but more with the enterprise focused GitLab which bundles CI/CD along with code hosting and bunch of other things.
Their focus is primarilily on Enterprise developer needs and bundling CI/CD, Internal Developer Platforms, Security, Compliance and now code hosting. They want to be the one shop for everything developer experience inside an enterprise.
[Source: Not a customer or a user or employee, was at their conference in SF today]
I hate to focus on this, but the website, https://gitness.com/, is absolutely horrible. Especially on mobile. The scrolljacking seems outright hostile and the entire site feels janky and broken. You don't need scrolljacking to provide a compelling or visually differentiated design experience.
Yes. Dark mode is coming. Code Snippet management is a great suggestion and we will absolutely pick this up. Thanks for testing it out. Hit us up in our Slack channel if you have any future suggestions or if there is anything we can do to help.
We felt like bringing CI and SCM together was a natural evolution for the project. It is something Brad, the creator of Drone, always envisioned. Harness and its Founder, Jyoti, shared the vision and made a big investment in making this happen. It is awesome to see this breathe new life into a great open source project
It is interesting how many teams and even large businesses fall into the github/gitlab/atlassian trap. I worked for a couple that spend a shit-ton of money to have some measure of "cloud agnostics" while they throw out their Jenkins servers and they migrate all of their cicd to github, gitlab or atlassian. With github it is a SaaS service. With Gitlab, they have an "enterprise" version. In quotes because the "enterprise" version has no scaling support. You can't run more than one active node. And if you use their special "geo" feature for read only nodes they can't run cicd. It is really ridiculous any large business would migrate from a couple of fleets of Jenkins to this. But hey, gotta do what business decided to do.
[+] [-] prepend|2 years ago|reply
Seems odd that he wouldn’t know about Sourcehut (2018) and Gitea (2016).
[+] [-] inferiorhuman|2 years ago|reply
The others mentioned are more or less knockoffs of GitHub, because at one point GitHub was quite worth emulating.
[+] [-] lolinder|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bradrydzewski|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cmjs|2 years ago|reply
They definitely know about Gitea – though they don't acknowledge it, it's partly based on Gitea. https://github.com/harness/gitness/pull/3364/files#diff-4673...
[+] [-] az09mugen|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] manugarg|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] remram|2 years ago|reply
The "Community Edition" links on https://docs.drone.io/ are all broken because of this.
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] drackomalkavian|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] koolba|2 years ago|reply
Wouldn’t this violate the git trademark policy?
https://git-scm.com/about/trademark
From that link:
>> In addition, you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service without Conservancy's written permission. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision applies even to third-party marks that use the Marks as a syllable or as part of a portmanteau to refer to a product or service's use of Git code.
[+] [-] troymc|2 years ago|reply
My guess is that Software Freedom Conservancy (a nonprofit) has more important things to do than go after those projects for trademark policy violations.
[+] [-] esperent|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lazypenguin|2 years ago|reply
If you don't even use your own product why should anyone else use it?
[+] [-] rustd|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] booi|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheBrokenRail|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bradrydzewski|2 years ago|reply
There was a lot of discussion internally about what message it would send if we also published the source code on GitHub. I was very adamant that we need to host on GitHub because this is where Open Source collaboration happens today, and we need to meet developers where they are today.
No shame here.
It is important to remember that Gitea is a very popular project and is a success by any measure with tens of thousands of installs, and they host on GitHub. I don't think that detracts from how awesome their product is. GitLab also hosted on GitHub in the early days to grow their community.
I definitely hope that one day, developers will love Gitness as much as they love GitHub, and they will choose Gitness to host their Open Source communities. But that will take a lot of time and a lot of work. We are here for it, but today is just a humble day 1 launch. We have years of work ahead of us.
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Prickle|2 years ago|reply
It would be a bit risky to build your new git competitor inside itself, surely?
[+] [-] koito17|2 years ago|reply
Forgejo in particular has self-hosted actions runners that can be registered offline, and the runners themselves can be given labels and execute most existing GitHub actions (in fact, the yaml format they use is intentionally meant to be compatible with GitHub actions).
While the Pipelines UI looks nice, it hides all the very real details of deployment (and configuration) in a variety of environments. This is one thing Forgejo does well compared to e.g. Gitea for CI/CD, thanks to being very flexible in configuring runner secrets, registering runners, and so on. The runners themselves are also designed to run with rootless docker-in-docker. There is also the security aspect to consider. e.g. how does Pipelines prevent secrets from spilling in logs or people running bitcoin miners in CI? Does it offer a better level of security than Forgejo/Gitea here?
The reason I am emphasizing CI/CD is because hosting code and a bug tracker is only one small aspect of GitHub IMO. The real big things are its popularity and GitHub Actions. It's not enough for many people (and businesses) to simply host code anymore. Many now expect commits pushed to certain branches to execute a variety of workflows -- from unit tests to full-on Kubernetes deployments.
[+] [-] hargup|2 years ago|reply
Their focus is primarilily on Enterprise developer needs and bundling CI/CD, Internal Developer Platforms, Security, Compliance and now code hosting. They want to be the one shop for everything developer experience inside an enterprise.
[Source: Not a customer or a user or employee, was at their conference in SF today]
[+] [-] xwowsersx|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mdaniel|2 years ago|reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37597901
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37600545 (I would argue for this one, since it provides the most context)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37601002
[+] [-] maxloh|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] moondev|2 years ago|reply
Pretty impressive so far, the pipeline tool is surprisingly robust already.
"gist-like" snippet management would be awesome in this.
[+] [-] bradrydzewski|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eka1|2 years ago|reply
How does the project already have 27k stars? Surely this was not public before?
Or do you think drone always had this product?
[+] [-] lolinder|2 years ago|reply
https://github.com/harness/gitness/forks
So the stars all carried over.
The old drone link now redirects to gitness:
https://github.com/harness/drone
[+] [-] rustd|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Roark66|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] permissionrate|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nikolay|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cmjs|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bradrydzewski|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nik736|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jauntywundrkind|2 years ago|reply
How compatible have Drone CI and it's open-source fork Woodpecker? I'm curious whether one might expect any kind of engine swap to work.
[+] [-] dspillett|2 years ago|reply
I understand it being on GitHub because that might get them more traction, but should the not be hiding primarily on their own text?
[+] [-] petre|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bradrydzewski|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] djmips|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] v3ss0n|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MassiveBonk51|2 years ago|reply