Git for SketchUcation?
-
We spent some time implementing an open source Git for testing.
It works exactly like github and it offers public and private repos, snippets etc.
Our query is this. The open source platform we tested allows for 20 users for free.
It is €49 per user per yr up to 100 users. So we are talking €4900 per and up.
We've still some wrinkles to overcome but if having a dedicated Git here is something you'd like let us know here.
-
Yay!
-
I thought I was the dedicated git around here?
-
Advantages ?
-
Disadvantages?
-
@dan rathbun said:
Advantages ?
Repos could easily be listed. Today it's not easy to know which plugin is hosted on github/bitbucket.
This would lead to more collaboration within the SU community, etc.Don't you think?
-
I prefer Mercurial over Git myself.
-
kool... but far too expensive...
-
Less expensive than building from scratch.
-
What does it do that's so valuable?
-
Allow devs to keep a history of code.
Allows others to suggest improvements.
It's like Facebook for Klingons.
-
So the expense is server space or? That just seems really expensive. I thought there were open source gits that were free to run?
-
The price is for a seat per user. So it is free for 20 users. Then 49 per user up to 100.
Basically the 20 user version is the trial.
I don't think 5000 is to bad when you consider it is $1 per week per user.
We need definitely get by on 20 seats to begin but I do think giving devs the best version control system, with bug tracking etc. is the way to go.
We could crowd-fund the project or even look for some type of sponsorship.
-
Well, I'm no developer... My interest is in this is from a web hosting and website construction point of view and I don't get what costs so much money. Is it for this company to host the website? Are there "code pros" that check your work? If it were just the code for a website that did as you say, acted as a repository with revision controls then I don't know why sketchucation wouldn't host something like this http://git-scm.com/ on it's own server? Or is it because the work will be commercial and this is like a fee based on commercial use? My dedicated server starts at like .08¢ per hour which would be like $700 per year.
-
That's a git terminal or GUI.
Here I am talking about giving devs a place to store info in the same manner that github does.
-
@rich o brien said:
Disadvantages?
Why does this offer over GitHub or BitBucket?
BitBucket even offer free private repos.And beside just Git, are there other features around it? Like you see on BitBucket with issue trackers, Wiki, group management, download sections.
There is also the matter of BitBucket and GitHub especially are the de-facto standard Git service providers with all the community around it for sharing and contributing.
@krisidious said:
So the expense is server space or? That just seems really expensive. I thought there were open source gits that were free to run?
I ditto this question. I'm wondering what are the advantages one would be paying for?
-
@thomthom said:
Why does this offer over GitHub or BitBucket?BitBucket even offer free private repos.
It will be free here too.
@thomthom said:
And beside just Git, are there other features around it? Like you see on BitBucket with issue trackers, Wiki, group management, download sections.
Everything you see in GitHub/BitBucket is available also. Issues, Wikis, Tracking, Gists etc...
@thomthom said:
I ditto this question. I'm wondering what are the advantages one would be paying for?
No member will pay for the service I just put the price out there so devs were aware of the cost.
-
Right, I see. That confused me.
But I still don't see the advantage. Not something I felt was missing.
The advantage of GitHub is that "everyone" is there already, making the threshold for sharing and collaborating in essence zero. There's is this big community of pretty much every open source project available in one central place to track - why "go off the grid"?...now, if there was a "Push to Publish" feature...
-
@thomthom said:
The advantage of GitHub is that "everyone" is there already, making the threshold for sharing and collaborating in essence zero. There's is this big community of pretty much every open source project available in one central place to track - why "go off the grid"?
We are simply playing with the idea of giving devs better version control in an environment where other devs gather.
Each to their own though.
It'll either be used or not. Hence the original post.
-
I think it's a great plan and I think it would definitely be used... I'm just wondering why it couldn't be implemented for less money.
Advertisement