<story><title>Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab</title><url>https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GitLab_consultation#Outcome</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>zzzeek</author><text>I think I have some relevant experience here.&lt;p&gt;We host all of our projects on github:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemy&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemy&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;yet we also use gerrit!&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;gerrit.sqlalchemy.org&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;gerrit.sqlalchemy.org&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;users send us pull requests, and they never have to deal with Gerrit ever.    We use a custom integration, the source code to which is here: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemyorg&amp;#x2F;publishthing&amp;#x2F;tree&amp;#x2F;master&amp;#x2F;publishthing&amp;#x2F;apps&amp;#x2F;prtogerrit&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemyorg&amp;#x2F;publishthing&amp;#x2F;tree&amp;#x2F;master&amp;#x2F;pu...&lt;/a&gt;  and then we mostly bidirectional synchronization between Gerrit and Github pull requests (code changes can move freely from Github PR -&amp;gt; gerrit, comments and code review comments are posted bidirectionally, Gerrit status changes are synchronized into the PR - example:  &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemy&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemy&amp;#x2F;pull&amp;#x2F;5662&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemy&amp;#x2F;sqlalchemy&amp;#x2F;pull&amp;#x2F;5662&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;I continue to find Gerrit&amp;#x27;s code review to be vastly better than Githubs.  Gitlab would take tremendous server resources to run internally and I like Github much better for the front-facing experience.&lt;p&gt;I wrote about an earlier form of our integration here: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;techspot.zzzeek.org&amp;#x2F;2016&amp;#x2F;04&amp;#x2F;21&amp;#x2F;gerrit-is-awesome&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;techspot.zzzeek.org&amp;#x2F;2016&amp;#x2F;04&amp;#x2F;21&amp;#x2F;gerrit-is-awesome&amp;#x2F;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;to sum up:&lt;p&gt;1. your project benefits massively by being on Github&lt;p&gt;2. Gerrit is awesome (for me)&lt;p&gt;3. gitlab is not very appealing to me UX-wise and self-hosting wise&lt;p&gt;4. you can still use pull requests from outside users and use gerrit for code reviews.</text></comment>
<story><title>Wikimedia is moving to Gitlab</title><url>https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GitLab_consultation#Outcome</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jancsika</author><text>Anyone thinking of moving to their own Gitlab instance with Gitlab CE-- either stay on Github or prepare to waste your time dealing with user spam bots that pollute your site&amp;#x27;s search results.&lt;p&gt;In other words-- if you want the common use case for a FOSS project:&lt;p&gt;1. publicly viewable main repository with publicly viewable issue tracker&lt;p&gt;2. requirement to log in to view all snippets, user profiles, perhaps even other repos as enforced by administrator settings (otherwise SEO bots will leverage these features to eat your search results)&lt;p&gt;3. anyone with an email can sign up to post issues to the main repo&amp;#x27;s issue tracker&lt;p&gt;There is no combination of settings in Gitlab CE to achieve this. Any sane approach has to leave out step #2. That means that your Gitlab instance gets hammered with user spam from bots which then get indexed in Google search results for your site.&lt;p&gt;Worse, Gitlab has no tools to make it easy to remove the user spam (and obviously no tools to prevent it from happening).&lt;p&gt;Just run a public-facing Gitlab CE instance for a few days. Search for one of the spam snippets you collect, and you&amp;#x27;ll find results for all the FOSS projects out there running their own Gitlab instances.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve never seen any solutions offered by Gitlab for this, nor frankly any interest in the myriad bug reports about them addressing this at all.&lt;p&gt;Edit: typo</text></comment>