| 1 |
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 12:57 PM Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> FWIW, I know/trust somebody who |
| 4 |
> blah blah blah |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
So, in theory self-hosted CE should be identical to using gitlab.com |
| 7 |
> and avoiding the use of the EE-only features. |
| 8 |
> blah blah |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Yeah, right. I work my ass off on this crap job all day and make peanuts. |
| 12 |
It's weird though, because in theory I could be a billionaire. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Knowing that gitlab.com is neither CE nor EE, and that there's this hosting |
| 15 |
thing to self-hosted, we couldn't spin up a proper GitLab service like the |
| 16 |
one on gitlab.com overnight if they pulled the plug on us. In other words, |
| 17 |
making use of and relying on their hosting, even using only CE features, |
| 18 |
would make us totally dependent on them, and hence not respecting our |
| 19 |
social contract. On the contrary, self hosting our own service, even using |
| 20 |
EE features, wouldn't make us necessarily dependent on them since |
| 21 |
EE-specific features are mostly useless (so is their support). The social |
| 22 |
contract does not forbid usage of non-free software, but dependence on it. |
| 23 |
Even if we were to use these EE features, knowing what they are I can |
| 24 |
hardly imagine they'd be a big loss if we decided or were forced to not use |
| 25 |
them any longer. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
GitLab is a very mediocre product for a large, security-focused company. |
| 28 |
The bad news is anything else is worse. The good news is a self-hosted CE |
| 29 |
GitLab service could be just what we need. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I happen to know someone too. Someone who has spent 100% of his time for |
| 32 |
the better part of the last two years setting up such a service at a large |
| 33 |
company with a platinum GitLab license. This person is currently sitting |
| 34 |
between my keyboard and my chair. |
Archives