First. Yes I sound alien (more than usual), the second mic was set to omnidirectional by mistake. Luckily we have more guests planned so next time it'll be better! :D
Open source for me I feel is the only valid option for 2 reasons, it's inline with Blender's ethos, and we have freedom to edit code to build the tools we need for a flexible and evolving developer platform. Either way, I am sure whatever direction Blender chooses, it will be the right choice...
I've heard good things of Gitea and SourceHut (this last one is an interesting FOSS one, but one that prides in simplicity, so might not fit the needs of the project). I use Gitlab for my personal stuff, but that's what it is (not 100% FOSS).
Personally, I love phabricator, and would hate to see it go. I use Gogs on my website. Gitea is a bit more beefy version of Gogs. They're both written in go. I don't think the documentation is very good on either. It will be weird to move from submitting patches with Arcanist to using Pull Requests. If Blender adopts Gitea (I think they should), then the new features we may add will end up beating Gitlab, anyway. Finally -- I'd love for it to be integrated in Blender --Cloud-- Studio! That would feel nice!
The Blender team would be wise to try to reduce the amount of friction for new contributors. The Phabricator patch submission system is one of the things that almost made me bounce off of doing any work for Blender because it seemed so anachronistic. Looking forward to a new system that uses pull requests instead!
Phabricator was originally developed as an internal tool at Facebook, later it became its own thing. It happens often like Bootstrap by Twitter. admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/
Usually it means that they stopped developing/supporting it. Facebook/Meta probably transitioned to another tool and didn't see a use for developing fabricator anymore.
I think gitea is a great solution. I use Gitea for storing my Unity projects and Gitlab for web development. Selfhosted Gitlab is cool, but it is really hungry for resources. I tied Gogs but I needed LFS, so I switch to Gitea ( it is like Gogs but with LFS support right out the box ). Issue trackers are pretty much similar between Gitlab and Gitea. Gitea does not have build in CI/CD I do not know how critical it is for blender development. Also Gitea is written on Go and as far as I know some of blender services also has written on Go, but I could be wrong.
@@scaredyfish Well mostly It is not about a Gitea itself but about Git + Git LFS for Unity project. If you decide to use this SCV for Unity so Gitea may be the software you want to use on your own remote server to store code and track issues & etc. I do not have a lot expertise on this field. I joined a devteam with no infrastructure at all. But I pretty much familiar with GIT so this why I choose GIT+GIT LFS. Also I have a small server 1 core CPU 1 Gb RAM and Gitea fits this server very well.
Gitlab 200%... Especially if you use the custom hosted version, it's very customisable, like Ph, full OSS. For the commercial plan, I think you would fit perfectly, but I'm pretty sure it will have limitations for external contributors
I use Gitlab (self hosted) for ages, and I personally love it and I would go with it. It has very nicely integrated CI, task management and more :) And will be happy to help with some migration to futher solution, or help with DevOps/Ops area...
Blender needs certain features that are only available in the enterprise version. The Blender team could develop some of those features themselves but by making them available to the world you're messing with their source of income, so there's an ethical situation there.
Phabricator was only initially developed by Facebook - it was being maintained by Phalicity. Just like Mercurial, facebook is behind some pretty good open-source software. As long as the license is free, there's no worries.
Gitlab would be terrible. Helping with the Inkscape GitLab project has been very limiting in terms of project management. There are many facets to a project. Just looking at it from a developers point of view isn't going to be doing Blender, the foundation or the community justice. This is a good opertunity to take more responsibility of the project and to set some direction for how the foundation is going to move forward and its aims. This is not a half hour conversation. This will take considerable effort and planning. You need to be thinking far beyond just code and think about everything that revolves around code implementation. Plenty of things in Blender have been poorly implemented because of a lack of conversation. Might be a good time to take stock and understand your audience. Who are your biggest stake holders, who do you want them to be whats your 3, 5, 10 year plan with projections? What's a user needs. a way a user works and wants to work. Something that should be fleshed out a lot more. Thats just the tip of the iceberg. All you have to do is ask?
in response to the title, "Gitlab? Gitea? ...." i would say that stay away from gitlab - it's NOT stable. * gitlab's interface in regards to git things sucks. * doing even basic git things from gitlab website is such a huge pain. * their development direction is always going haywire. things that were perfectly working last year are now in a state of mess, * they are super bad at addressing their bugs. the only thing gitlab is even close to being good at is - the page which shows a single issue (edit: that is, the commenting system) - just that, NOT even the whole issue management workflow.
no, that would be unnecessarily distracting and would lead to splitting the resources to something not the core. 'cz maintenence costs can be significant at times.
> _I think it may bring more control for the development of blender_ @@eternalguy6023 amh, but if blender f is able to find some good exisiting product which provides control, then the resouces could be saved. reinventing the wheel should be the last option for this case... the good thing is that they are looking for open source solutions, so, they will still be able to develop that further if they so wish to. so, best of both worlds. hey, that's the power of freedom & open source after all ;)
Github has interfered in open source projects in the past -- the way they comply with DMCA is the same way Google does: guilty until proven innocent. Moreover, they immediately shut down the developer protest by a certain Javascript program, without permission. Github is not to be trusted, even if they weren't owned by Micro$oft. Blender has already suffered bullying from Google several years back, for having a huge channel with no ads. Self-hosted means it's something we control and something we own. We won't be victims of Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish.
