[i0nutzb]

You may want to give more details about your usecase: do you need _only_ git hosting or other features too (e.g. issue tracker, CI/CD pipelines)? How many users will use this setup? Do you have a dedicated machine or you run it locally (e.g. in a docker container?? Hosting locally or in cloud?

IIRC Gitolite was aquired by Gitlab a while back, Gitweb is not really a git hosting, it's more like a web view of your `git log`

Gitlab needs at least a couple of gigs of RAM to run well, double/triple that if you need CI/CD.

I have no experience wiht gogs/gitea.

[fanf2]

Gitolite is open source maintained by Sitaram Chamarty https://gitolite.com/ so I don't think it's even possible to acquire it in the way you suggest.

Gitweb can work quite nicely with gitolite to provide a web view of your repositories, with access control managed by gitolite.

[gmemstr]

This poll is really me being curious about what the citizens of HN use themselves. My own use case would benefit greatly from CI/CD pipelines, but beyond that I'm mostly looking for a nice web interface to expose the repository contents.

[i0nutzb]

Then you don't have too much of a choice: gitlab all the way :)

We ran an gitlab instance for about eight years and it worked flawlesly[1] for a team of ~20, with quite a few active repos (i.e. constantly pushing), some of them being generously large, running several pipelines on most of them.

PS: gitorious was aquired by gitlab, not gitolite. My bad.

[1]: once we pumped up _LOT_ of RAM into it that is

[blueflow]

I would not recommend Gitlab. It is slow and buggy.

I cannot disclose details (we are premium customer and the bug reports would disclose my employer and identity), but every second week our Gitlab integration is blocked by some real shitty bug. Most common thing: Gitlab has a feature we need, but its only usable via WebUI and the API endpoint is broken or lacking in necessary details. So we cannot automate things that are very manpower-intensive.

[derN3rd]

We were also using Gitlab for a couple years now and are switching over to Github now. CI on Gitlab is nice, but Github Actions work very similar.

Most of our devs were annoyed by some external toolings that supported Github but not Gitlab, Gitlab being slow or down, markdown rendering being terrible slow as well as almost all of the PR additions (e.g. eslint checks, test coverage reports etc) being in the top tiers (with pricings being out of scope for us).

[chrisweekly]

Gitlab CI is powerful, and (IMHO/IME) a selling point compared to other options.

[vbezhenar]

In my company CI is pretty trivial. docker build . -t projectname:branchname and push it to the internal registry. For one project I set up additional docker run step to run integration test (it used docker itself so it was not possible to run it at build time which is docker limitation IMO). I remember setting up complex jenkins jobs back in the past, but at this time usually all you need is to build docker container from your project and actual build configuration is inside Dockerfile. And this should not require complex CI (and I spent more than one hour setting up Gitlab CI for this simple workflow). Gitlab CI is powerful indeed, but needlessly complex IMO. If I would set up project for myself, I probably would downshift to simple bash script like I did CI 15 years ago.