Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by arinlen 1377 days ago
> I said basic git hosting... I have no need for any of CICD pipline, or issue tracking features.

My point is that it makes no sense to adopt any third-party git hosting service is all you want to do is have a git repo somewhere, thus it makes no sense to complain about how a service is expensive when you do not have any reason to use the service to begin with. Services like GitHub or GitLab or BitBucket or AWS CodeCommit are pointless if all you need is a remote repo somewhere. Complaining that GitLab is expensive when you only need a git repo is like complaining that Netflix is expensive when you only need a screen saver.

1 comments

I'm not sure why you are so selectively reading my post.

I'll paste the first sentence of my first paragraph here again, it provides a good reason:

> I appreciate the one less job in maintaining self hosting... I have other things to maintain and would have happily paid with a reasonable markup.

Also you can't simultaneously argue that I have no right to use a service with which I can compete with against cost price and that I cannot possibly compete with their price. I get the sense that you have an axe to grind.

My argument is merely that the price change is excessively unreasonable for those who only wanted git hosting... and at it's core, it's a git hosting service.