News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by EpicEng on Sunday June 03, 2018 @08:15PM (#17223378)
>Eh? It’s literally three shell commands to install GitLab

As if installing gitlab was the last step in setting up a highly available and disaster safe git server.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by yoavm on Sunday June 03, 2018 @08:32PM (#17223458)
100% agreed. Maintaining a self hosted web service is a demanding task. It's not about updating to get some new features right when they're out - it's about security, and it's a real pain. The installation can get messed, so what? You're not using the tool yet. You can get a new VM. But when you're updating the machine the holds your code (heck, even GitLab.com had their issues with updates!), or the machine that holds your mail service - things get scary. Installation is not at all the issue.
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by coaxial on Sunday June 03, 2018 @10:26PM (#17224063)
The approach in taking to self hosted services is that if it's down for an hour or even a couple of days it's fine since I'm the main user.

For disaster recovery, I put everything in ansible playbooks and roles. The role also takes care of setting up hourly backups (with Borg) and will import the latest backup when setting up the service. Because backups are separate, I can delete the last couple of backups if they've been compromised.

It's obviously not as resilient as using the centralized equivalent, but it feels like a decent trade off.

Still iterating so discussions welcome.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by EpicEng on Monday June 04, 2018 @11:30AM (#17228706)
> The approach in taking to self hosted services is that if it's down for an hour or even a couple of days it's fine since I'm the main user.

Well, maybe, depends on what you're depending on that service for. However, we were talking about large scale centralization v decentralization. If you took everything currently on GitHub and moved it to a bunch of different self-hosted servers, you would have a problem. Many _do_ depend on what's there on GH.

Even if it's not critical, it really sucks to want something and not be able to get it for 2 days because Jim went on vacation and his server crashed.

> For disaster recovery, I put everything in ansible playbooks and roles. The role also takes care of setting up hourly backups (with Borg) and will import the latest backup when setting up the service. Because backups are separate, I can delete the last couple of backups if they've been compromised.

> It's obviously not as resilient as using the centralized equivalent, but it feels like a decent trade off.

The issue isn't that it cannot be done, it's that centralized services mean _I_ don't have to worry about it. I don't want to be a server admin; I just want to store my code in source control.

Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by neop1x on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @05:28AM (#17236101)
I do the same but use Restic for incremental backups. The problem is people have minds washed by corporate marketing. Unfortunatelly they think they need multi-datacenter high availabilty, machine learning and big data DBs where only minority people really need it. :(
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by dcbadacd on Monday June 04, 2018 @06:20AM (#17226333)
How beefy is your machine?
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by coaxial on Monday June 04, 2018 @01:00PM (#17229803)
Not very, some things I run on small 5 or 10$ digitalocean droplets, other things on my home "server' which is an i5 4th gen with 8gb ram. The borg server is rsync.net
Re:Microsoft Is Said to Have Agreed to Acquire GitHub by dcbadacd on Monday June 04, 2018 @06:21AM (#17226337)
And this is all assuming the person has the chance to do so, especially younger people can't really self-host or seriously lack the skill, programming alone is hard for them.