dogline
8 hours ago
Remember, if all you need is a git remote to push to somewhere via ssh, `git init --bare` on your server should be available and is solid if you don't need a web interface. Now you've got something you can push to on a shared server.
Unless you really also want a web interface, issue tracking, et. al. Then, use any of these fine tools. Go wild!
sandreas
an hour ago
Something like gitolite has the benefits of access control... act can hell with actions. But I like the webif approach
unsnap_biceps
6 hours ago
I don't really need the web interface, but the actions are useful. Automatically building updated docker images and software packages is enough to accept the gitea complications, but gitlab is way too heavy IMHO
SmasherEpilepti
6 hours ago
You can do that via hooks. You could probably even manage to hook up a CI engine like woodpecker via hooks and do it entirely that way.
Gitea or Forgejo with actions is almost certainly easier, but it's possible to do it with pure git.
unsnap_biceps
6 hours ago
Actions support running on times. Sure, I could wire up a Rube Goldberg of systemd user timers and user units that trigger on hooks or I can store some yaml in the repo and it just works (tm)(r).
Sometimes the juice isn't worth the squeeze, and for me, doing it all custom isn't worth it for my home projects.
sublinear
2 hours ago
That's an interesting perspective.
I feel like this is one of those topics where compromise is futile. I use GitLab at work and use plain git on personal projects. I don't like spending time on tools that aren't either teaching me or paying me.
broodbucket
7 hours ago
It is kind of nuts how seemingly a generation of programmers came to think Git = GitHub
