if you aren’t paying for the infrastructure then you cannot depend on it. and if you’re paying for infrastructure, you should own it.

> The policy has therefore been suggested to help GitLab's finances remain sustainable.

I guess open-core doesn't pays that well…

@lanodan @icedquinn operating a public forge is likely to be a loss leader though

@ariadne @lanodan i think github also bled money. they just got picked up by an evil megacorporation before they ran out of runway.
@ariadne @icedquinn Yup, but I think it's a needed loss leader.

If you want people to use Gitlab, they should be able to feel like using it for basic things and I'm pretty sure most people after having that kind of stuff will look at how unhostable the thing is and look elsewhere for lighter alternatives.

@lanodan @icedquinn

sure, the loss leader aspect can be justified by any competent org as marketing expense. i'm sure that's how github does it in their accounting...

@ariadne @icedquinn Yeah, which reminds me of how hard it is to have gitlab accept your money in cases where there is a limitation.
It's like hollywood kind of bullshit where they provide no legal offer for the most common needs.

Thanks for the heads-up; something I'll have to sort out on short notice. Do you have some good suggestions where I can move it all for free?

@ariadne TODO for today: migrate all my !gitea projects to my gitea

@lotte i need to fix the theme on mine, gitea 1.17 broke it

@ariadne oh 1.17 is out i can switch away from the rc now

@ariadne Well, if gitlab wants to do delete old projects, it's time to move open source to @codeberg, i guess.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Treehouse Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!