this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2024
231 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59358 readers
4794 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Expect more enshittification coming your way.

top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 94 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Typical that the title does mention Google (who currently has a minority stake) but not Datadog, who would become the new owner.

But yeah, I don't foresee a new owner making things better for gitlab.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 24 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't know, seems like being owned by Google would be worse. They kill stuff left and right.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But they have been partially owned by Google for the past time, and the product has been great.

Google's involvement is only going to lessen, so the only reason to put so much emphasis on that in the headline would be to get those rage clicks.

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Partially owned gives room for the product to stay alive. It being fully owned by Google makes it subject to being killed.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I guess responses like yours is the reason the headline didn't mention the actual party gitlab is in talks with. People just love to have their villain.

Ignore the headline. Read the article. Gitlab is not about to sell to Google. They are about to sell to Datadog.

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

Selling to Datadog isn't a guarantee. The most important detail is that they're exploring a sale, and other companies are probably going to be interested.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Oh, neat, DataDog. So if you add a new label to a repo your monthly bill would rocket to the moon.

I feel this so much. We evaluated them at work, and while they did pretty much exactly what we wanted, we weren't willing to pay their fees.

[–] jherazob@fedia.io 49 points 3 months ago (5 children)

This worries me, i can see the new owners killing the Community edition and/or enshittifying the software to uselessness. Do we have a FOSS alternative that does the whole CI/CD pipeline too?

[–] souperk@reddthat.com 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Gitea and forejo are doing some amazing work

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 16 points 3 months ago

Codeberg, but you have to manually apply for the CI/CD part. Also, Codeberg only allows you to host FOSS projects.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
[–] mhm@programming.dev 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

SourceHut is worth checking out. It leans towards minimal aesthetics, but is actually very functional. Granted, the workflow is quite different than other VCS providers, but you may grow into it, like I have :)

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

SourceHut burns my eyes. Has Drew (or someone to whom he has delegated such things) announced a dark mode yet?

[–] communism@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Dark Reader browser extension or just a userstyle. For me, Dark Reader works very well for sourcehut.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago

Thanks, but I know browser extensions exist. I was just curious whether it's going to be supported natively.

[–] mhm@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

BTW, SourceHut now automatically switches to light/dark mode based on your OS settings.

Unless I made a mistake checking it the last time, it’s like Drew saw your comment and took it personally xD

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Haha... Maybe he keeps tabs on the fediverse?

It doesn't work with Resist Fingerprinting mode (which hides OS settings), and doesn't have a manual toggle that I can see, but does now have a @media(prefers-color-scheme:dark) clause in its CSS. That's a step in the right direction. :)

Thanks for the tip!

[–] mhm@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

No. But, FWIW, Dark Reader, and similar extensions work very well on the site.

[–] jbk@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago

Why not fork the latest CE?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 25 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I don't think tech people understand how bad it is that Microsoft owns GitHub.

GitLab is one of the few places people could go if GitHub enshittifies too much. Google's stake in it (or full ownership of it) would probably be a good thing, because it would be seen as an important strategic hedge against Microsoft. If it's bought by a smaller player, I can see GitHub squeezing it into irrelevance.

[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I view Gitea as the real alternative to GitHub. I was very big on GitLab for a long time, and think any competition is good, but I'd really like it if more people could seriously invest in Gitea.

They're also working on ActivityPub support: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/18240

[–] odelik@lemmy.today 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

I just wish GitHub wasn't part of MS anymore.

I also don't want Gitlab owned by another megacorp.

Something funded by the government but ran by a public org would be ideal.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I just wish GitHub wasn’t part of MS anymore.

Too bad. Microsoft is using it as part of their extremely long term plan to control the software that developers use to do their jobs. VSCode is another front in that battle. Things are going slowly, but they're winning.

[–] boonhet@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

VSCode is another front in that battle. Things are going slowly, but they’re winning.

They replaced Atom with VSCode, but some of the Atom devs are now working on Zed, which finally has Linux support. Or for a paid alternative, we have the Jetbrains suite, which can be excellent if that's your thing.

For Github, we still have Gitlab as an alternative, but once that goes, we have Gitea or Forgejo to move to.

The thing is that many developers are a vengeful bunch who hate big corps with their enshittification fetishes and love open source solutions. Microsoft has to tread really carefully here.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

but some of the Atom devs are now working on Zed

Ok... but just because someone's working on an alternative doesn't mean that alternative will be able to unseat VSCode. Microsoft is spending tens of millions per year to gently lock people into VSCode.

The thing is that many developers are a vengeful bunch who hate big corps with their enshittification fetishes and love open source solutions. Microsoft has to tread really carefully here.

And they have been treading carefully for decades, and it's working. The people who supposedly hate big corps mostly use GitHub and VSCode. They're heating the water very, very slowly, and the frogs are staying in the pot.

[–] communism@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

Something funded by the government but ran by a public org would be ideal.

"the government" which government?

I don't want software beholden to any state interests. I see donationware as the way to go; or if donations can't sustain server costs, donations for sustaining development, and then a public flagship instance which people can pay to use, or self-host for their own server costs.

Why the government? There are plenty of free git hosting services out there, take your pick. If gitlab goes away, move to gitea, forgejo, gitosis, etc.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

GitLab is a parade of avoidable CVEs. There are better alternatives to worry for.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What if source forge bought it lmao

[–] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Let's explore the scenarios

Scenario 1: GitLab is acquired by Google

Scenario 2: GitLab is acquired by Apple

Scenario 3: GitLab is acquired by a State government

Scenario 4: Gitlab is acquired by Amazon

Scenario 5: Gitlab is acquired by the Linux Foundation

Scenario 6: Gitlab is acquired by the Federal Government

Scenario 7: Gitlab is acquired by IBM

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 months ago

Scenario 8: Gitlab is acquired by Wal*Mart

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago

What if JetBrains bought it though

[–] dyc3@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Let's be real, 3 and 6 are not possible

[–] sleepmode@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago

This would explain why some people I know that work there are panicking.

[–] frog_brawler@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago
[–] SuperiorOne@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

If that happens, I'll create a preemptive PR on KilledByGoogle.