Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mesa Begins Its Transition To Gitlab

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by timofonic View Post
    You are wrong.



    GitLab is Open Source, but not Free Source.

    - Community Edition is more "free-like". A MIT license, I think to remember. But it's Open Source, of course in MIT/BSD style.
    This is bullshit.

    According to the FSF, the MIT license (actually Expat License) is "a lax, permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with the GNU GPL. " so you should not make such bold statements.

    Free software does not require a copyleft license. A lot of drivers in mainline kernel are actually MIT licensed, not GPLv2.



    And yes by "MIT license" they do mean the Expat license.
    https://gitlab.dep.state.fl.us/help/...t/licensing.md

    Comment


    • #12
      Why did they go on self hosted solution instead of using GitLab hosted?
      I find GitLab superior to GitHub mainly because of its better issue system and the Math support in MarkDown.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Royi View Post
        Why did they go on self hosted solution instead of using GitLab hosted?
        Others said that gitlab hosted has crappy providers. Self-hosted for big projects is usually better as you have more control on the server or VM instance.

        Comment


        • #14
          Hosted seems mostly ok but I suspect would be snappier of we self hosted it.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Pajn View Post
            Self hosted -> Gitlab, no question
            There are questions. Gitlab is very slow. A lot of people choose Gitea or Gogs for example.

            Comment

            Working...
            X