Follow-Up: GitHub or Gitlab?


Let’s start the follow-up discussion. Would you as a Silverblue contributor and/or user like the docs and issues hosted on GitHub or Gitlab?

For more information and past discussion, see first poll.

  • GitHub
  • Gitlab

0 voters


A couple of notes I’d like to make:

  • GitHub supports unlimited private repos for open-source teams now (for e.g. security stuff).
  • There’s integration with Azure Pipelines for CI.
  • Of course, there’s still the standing benefit of several other Silverblue-related projects being on GitHub, not to mention that you can now (finally) move issues between repos.

  • GitHub supports unlimited private repos for open-source teams now (for
    e.g. security stuff).

How do you imagine making something private, hiding it from the public, would
help with security?

  • There’s integration with Azure Pipelines for CI.

How is this a pro? Were you listing it as a con?


However, comparing with GitLab, neither is a pro, because GitLab always has unlimited private repos from brith, besides it isn’t a pro for a community because I think a community shouldn’t hold a private thing in a third party. For CI, you can read in for more ont only for Azure.
So, Are you a spy from Microsoft? XD


Haha, I should’ve been more specific. Some projects use stuff like that as a simple way to have security notices in a place where they’re shared with the rest of the team, but not with the world until they’re fixed so they’re not exploited.

Why would it be a con? :thinking: It’s a pretty good CI service for stuff in general.


N–no, no…

ack they found out


On GitHub we have:

  • rpm-ostree
  • CoreOS
  • Flatpak
  • buildah
  • podman

We could cross-reference issues and get contributors on those to have a look at Silverblue issues the easy way.


FOSS platform vs closed one…


Gitlab is Open Core not FOSS, also I would not base the choice only on this criteria, I think now that GitHub is part of Microsoft it not forbidden to think that it could be Open Source in future.


GitLab CE (What I assume is being proposed here) is 100% free software.
Additionally, Microsoft taking over GitHub is essentially ensuring that it
will never be FLOSS.


There are three versions of GitLab: The open-source Community Edition stack you download and host yourself, an enterprise version with more features, and the publicly-hosted I’ve been assuming all along that “moving Fedora from Pagure to GltLab” meant the third option - publish the projects on Is that not the case - would Fedora staff up and set up servers if they went the GitLab direction?


This vote is absolutely about the hosted variants on and - there are no plans (or resources) to have it on premise for now (meaning 1+ years) and it would also defeat the purpose of creating awareness in the next 2-3 years in non-Fedora communities.


Whew! Glad to hear it! I’m still #teamgithub though. :wink:


Oh, I see. I could probably provide a GitLab CE instance sponsored by
Splentity if that would be a reasonable option. GitLab CE is very easy to
maintain, and I already have an Ansible playbook to handle Splentity’s own


Thank you for the offer, we appreciate that!

The issue with hosting Gitlab or any piece of software isn’t the setup, though, it’s the ongoing maintenance and updates. Unless you have dedicated ops people taking care of it, you outsource. That is the whole promise of cloud computing. Getting it into Fedora infrastructure by spinning up a VM and installing Gitlab isn’t the problem. It is that Fedora infrastructure is then reliable for maintaining it, managing backups, and guaranteeing up-time which they cannot do at the moment.

I used to maintain a Gentoo server for a small institute at university as well as my own for my own needs. The moment software needs to be reliable, you have to take a step back and admit you cannot do this on your own in some spare time anymore. Then it becomes about what you can and want to focus on and you have to make some decisions regarding time, money, and where you want to put your skills to use. Silverblue is bleeding edge, currently with lots of bleeding. So we need contributors to create content, documentation, and work on all the different bits and pieces - mostly rpm-ostree, GNOME, Flatpak.


Ok, is not foss, altrought big part of it’s code is MIT licensed, you have a point there.

But it supports an eventual easy migration of code and issues to a selfhosted fully MIT licensed gitlab ce, it’s a big plus.

And yeah, github could be opened by ms, or could not :wink:

I don’t like the idea of being more and more dependant on a third party non open platform that doesn’t officialy support exporting the issues history.

I feel more confortable on a platform that eventually could be replicated on self hosted FOSS instance


I would happily sign on to maintain it myself, along with the others, it’s not
hard to maintain GitLab CE at all, even with a patched version like the one
Splentity uses. Nobody has to work alone these days, automation is simple.
While I personally don’t see a usecase for Silverblue, I certainly do want to
help the project along and I’d love for it to keep to Fedora’s values. This is
not possible while hosting the project on a proprietary platform… Admittedly, is not as bad as GitHub, we can at least see the code, even if we
don’t have rights to it.


All fine with me, I just wanted to point out that this should not be the only criteria when making the decision :slight_smile:


Wow, talk about close!


Doesn’t Gnome use GitLab? Although pragmatically speaking, there is the fact that core projects to Silverblue already are hosted on GitHub… But there are a lot of passionate people not wanting to give on principle of not really open source over slightly more not really open source. It is kinda splitting hairs, and the vote shows how fine the point I guess.