GitLab and GitHub


#1

I read today that Microsoft has made free private GitHub repositories (which were previously something like $8/mo)… so while we have our own local gitlabs install for rapid deploy to multiple servers, more and more people will now use GitHub.com (I imagine) for their own private repositories (limits on free private by limiting number of collaborators)

–edit - yes true!


3 collaborators for private repositories


How you handle LOCAL vs LIVE Server?
#2

hmm I was just about to dive in Gitlab - isn’t it better?


#3

I have public GitHub repositories and a dev gitlab install (used for geoplugin), and I can’t say I see any difference (AFAIK, gitlabs is what drives GitHub, but without the $ limitations)


#4

Is GitLab behind GitHub? as used software? I didn’t knew that.

GitLab seems to have a great community and good development. Would prefer that for the private source code instead of GitHub and MS :slight_smile: you can’t trust them


#5

from https://usersnap.com/blog/gitlab-github/

Authentication Levels

With GitLab you can set and modify people’s permissions according to their role. In GitHub, you can decide if someone gets a read or write access to a repository.

With GitLab you can provide access to the issue tracker (for example) without giving permission to the source code. This is obviously great for larger teams and enterprises with role-based contributors.

Built-in CI / CD & going Beyond CD

One of the big differences between GitLab and GitHub is the built-in Continuous Integration/Delivery of GitLab. CI is a huge time saver for many development teams and a great way of QA (nobody likes pull requests that break your application).

GitLab offers their very own CI for free. No need to use an external CI service. And if you are already used to an external CI, you can obviously integrate with Jenkins, Codeship and others.

As GitLab mentioned with its latest release of 10.0, GitLab is clearly addressing the DevOps market as well offering a operations dashboard that lets you understand the dependencies of your development and DevOps efforts.

I think I was naive in CI by assuming it was “normal” to git!!!


#6

Yes, GitLab is behind GitHub, but it does seem there are many integrations in GitLab, not available to free GitHub use. I am like you, private is private and so would never trust putting proprietary code on a remote non-controlled repository, hence the gitlab install (really easy to setup btw)
Now, I see something like continuous integration, which I believed was automatic in GitHub (though never tested) is actually a strong point out of the box with gitlab. That really is important for live deployment where multiple users have pushed changes!


#7

Love CI - would like to do it with the Wappler dev but it isn’t easy to do CI on an UI tool…

But there are some good developments coming in place to make that also happening like google puppeteer


#8

Sure, but as a phase 1, without CI, a git clone/push (fork/merge) in addition to (s)ftp would also be great and let the maintainer deal with accepting merges to not break things…
Just floating ideas - I’ll personally always be a Coda addict, mainly because I’m doing mostly backend work, but Wappler as a frontend powerhouse is just as powerful (well, ok more powerful by a long way!).
Wappler isn’t for server admin’ing or nuts and bolts things - it does what it does best: Providing the tools for frontend development. It shouldn’t be there to handle merge problems to a repository - the admin is there for that. But I think (read: would like to see!) “remote” deployment should allow remote to be a repository URL, rather than live…


#9

Oh yes definitely- I was talking about CI for our own development of the Wappler app

As for publishing with git - yes we will definitely get there ASAP