[hambos22]

It's been 9 months since I ditched Github.

Currently I self-host Gitea [0], use its registry for Docker, NPM etc and act runners [1] for github actions alternative, everything secured under tailnet.

I'm extremely satisfied with that setup. It is batteries included & fire and forget.

Now I use Github only as backup by mirroring my self hosted repos.

[0] https://gitea.com

[1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/act-runner

[permalac]

Similar with forgejo. I mirrored all gh then flipped the ones I was using the most. The biggest win was on running apple runners in my mac, so the free gh actions can do other stuff.

[embedding-shape]

Getting better, more reliable and faster CI was such an underappreciated gain (from me at least) when moving to a self-hosted git platform. What used to take ~40 minutes end-to-end (from pushing commit to having release binary ready for three platforms) now takes less than 10 minutes, and seemingly that whole slowdown was causing me more headache that I think I was willing to admit at the time.

[BrandoElFollito]

I self host gitea for my personal-personal projects, the ones nobody will ever see.

For the personal-opensource ones, I am on Github because this is where everyone is when I want to share/collaborate etc

[rozularen]

actually good approach and the one that could make me switch to selfhosting

[Jnr]

I similarly have been using Gitea for some years. I use it as my main forge and mirror to Github for discoverability and community reports and contributions.

For public projects I have workflows that can publish and push containers to both Gitea and Github.

[onesandofgrain]

You use github as a backup, why bother self-hosting then?

[hambos22]

Github is an extra layer of backup, among normal backups.

[edit]

Notable reasons:

- Github runners went oftenly out of space & they were slow. With self hosted runners I don't have these issues anymore because I control the hardware.

Previously I was paying Docker Build Cloud/Depot for performance + Github Pro for extra minutes. Now it's zero cost, superb performance and unlimited minutes.

- I have a centralized registry with private packages and images.

- It's secure, I don't worry if I accidentally make a repo public or leak secrets. I control the access to it in network level.

- I own everything, in case something goes nuts (eg lose access to GH) I'm safe.

[onesandofgrain]

If you're using github as a backup, then whatever you say you own, they also own. So I still don't understand why you are self-hosting and using github as an extra layer of backup. Seems philosophically inconsistent.

[hambos22]

Nothing philosophical here. Whatever makes you productive.

I own the git, the runners, the registry etc and just use GH for backup. GH cannot interrupt suddenly my business.

[stanac]

Not GP. Probably less dependencies on github, e.g. actions which sometimes don't work. This way github is a "dumb backup".

I selfhost forgejo (gitea fork) on home sever (nuc), similar setup with tailscale. I was planning to setup git mirror on a remote VM for backup, but since I am the only one using it and have everything on dev laptop and remote backups of nuc server I didn't bother to do that (I know I still should).

[rozularen]

what are your home server specs to self host forgejo?

[stanac]

NUC 11 i5-1135G7 with 32gb of ram and one nvme. Bought it new years ago.

For forgejo I host only code and packages there, everything is built on dev pc since I am the only one using it. It also host postgresql server, jellyfin (for music only), custom OPDS server (for books only) SMB shared directory I can use from multiple PCs, some test environments for personal projects and possibly more things I forgot.

It's a small pc but it works without problems. I do have to clean it from time to time (with cheap battery-powered air duster) to keep the thermals low.

[rozularen]

yeah i have 3 NUCs at home, albeit with less ram and smaller hdd than yours. im already using them for dokploy and other services so trying to selfhost forgeo or gitea might bring it to its max.

[wseqyrku]

> This way github is a "dumb backup"

Eh? What GH department do you work in anyways? Training Data Sustainability?

[stanac]

I don't understand your question. If I was working for GH would I be selfhosting forgejo?

edit: If you think I sound like an LLM, I guess that is what happens when most of your interactions in English language are with LLMs.

[jjgreen]

Given the state of it, you might well ...

[stanac]

I missed the opportunity to add "you are absolutely right".

[wseqyrku]

> If I was working for GH would I be selfhosting forgejo?

Why not. But you are saying github as a dumb backup makes sense when you do self-hosting. I don't think you really believe that.

[Brian_K_White]

GH as a backup and a downstream public mirror for a self-hosted gitea or similar is entirely purposful. None of your comments have made any sense.

[walrus01]

Because the existence and continued normal operation of the primary is not dependent upon the capricious whims or instability of GitHub.

[close04]

The self hosting will still be there and working as expected no matter what GH does (fails... again, DMCAs the repo, bans the account, etc.). Self hosting isn't only about being the only one with the data, it's also for the independence aspect. GH as a backup doesn't hinder the independence. Network effects are strong and make a lot of developers still have a GH presence as a secondary platform.

The evolution is when one can finally fully disconnect from GH, the main self hosted platform will continue to operate as if nothing happened.

A migration can have a period of parallel running.