50
Git without a forge
(www.chiark.greenend.org.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
50 points (100.0% liked)
Programming
20172 readers
517 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I worked at a place that just had a git on a sftp server and that was it. Worked well in a small team. Git is made for it.
Having a separate issue tracker turned out to not be a big deal at all. Theres a lot of niceties github has, but it turns out you really dont need a whole bunch to make good software.
Nowadays i would probably go with gitea or forgeo if I had to self host, but git by itself is perfectly fine.
You can't use that to assert that your view about not having something is correct.
IMO a bug tracker and PR review system are essentially and cannot be taken away. It would seem like most of the world agrees with me.
Others have already mentions gerrit, no need to review on the forge, and there's as well gitweb. I imagine there exists many other solutions much better than the forge MR/PR. Particularly reviewing PRs on github is really messy for me. Depending on how complex the review might become I end up branching to the PR branch locally and checking the complex stuff locally without the forge.
And there are many many bug trackers much better than the issue trackers. Bugzilla actually has kept improving, though I believe it might be too much for small projects, but there are many more.
I do agree with the article writer that one really needs to create too many accounts already, GH from MS, Gitlab, sourcehut.org (I really like this one better, but still you need yet another account), codeberg, gitea, and some with different instances with different accounts each... It's crazy, and now AI crawlers getting on them all, and also violating FLOSS licenses... Notice on distributed private repos it's way harder for AI misbehavior and illegal behavior to do what it does in general.
That's just assembling a forge from pieces...
well yes... that's what one expects when they go DIY.
So, Fossil is perfect?
Fossil has a lot of features and config knobs.
Did you not do code reviews? It's the main thing I would miss. Being able to comment in-line, and manage iterations, is very valuable to me.
We did. You bring down the branch and then discuss. We used jetbrains and it had a function like that. But it was a while back.
Gerrit still exists for that. Whether it's currently best, idk.
Gerrit is a hosted service, no?
You can self host it.
Their comment was about not having any hosted service though.
What does that even mean? If it's a service, it's a program running on some computer somewhere. Is that not hosting?
They were talking about hosting the git repository via sftp - so bare file transfer - a bare repository. And how that was enough for them.
While that is also hosted, and hosted through a service, it's only a file transfer service and hosting.
That means specifically without a hosted service like a forge or gerrit.
Which is why I was interested in how they handle stuff that is usually done through such forges and services / hosted software.
Oh I see. The Linux kernel has been doing fine with mailing lists (LKML) for decades, if that helps.