Skip to content(if available)orjump to list(if available)

Migrating Dillo from GitHub

Migrating Dillo from GitHub

23 comments

·November 30, 2025

xrd

I've been messing around with GitLab as a self hosted alternative for a few years. I do like it, but it is resource intensive!

For the past few days I've been playing with Forgejo (from the Codeberg people). It is fantastic.

The biggest difference is memory usage. GitLab is Ruby on Rails and over a dozen services (gitlab itself, then nginx, postgrest, prometheus, etc). Forgejo is written in go and is a single binary.

I have been running GitLab for several years (for my own personal use only!) and it regularly slowly starts to use up the entirety of the RAM on a 16GB VM. I have only been playing with Forgejo for a few days, but I am using only 300MB of the 8 GB of RAM I allocated, and that machine is running both the server and a runner (it is idle but...).

I'm really excited about Forgejo and dumping GitLab. The biggest difference I can see if that Forgejo does not have GraphQL support, but the REST API seems, at first glance, to be fine.

throwaway150

> Additionally, GitHub seems to encourage a "push model" in which you are notified when a new event occurs in your project(s), but I don't want to work with that model. Instead, I prefer it to work as a "pull model", so I only get updates when I specifically look for them. This model would also allow me to easily work offline. Unfortunately, I see that the same push model has been copied to alternative forges.

Someone kind enough to explain this to me? What's the difference between push model and pull model? What about push model makes it difficult to work offline?

bayindirh

AFAIK, the author wants to work like how Source Hut and Linux kernel works: by e-mails.

When you're working with e-mails, you sync your relevant IMAP box to local, pulling all the proposed patches with it, hence the pull model.

Then you can work through the proposed changes offline, handle on your local copy and push the merged changes back online.

throwaway150

All of this makes sense. Thank you for explaining. I don't think I understand the difference though.

Like are they calling the "GitHub pull request" workflow as the push model? What is "push" about it though? I can download all the pull request patches to my local and work offline, can't I?

the__alchemist

We are in the disapora phase; there is a steady stream of these announcements, each with a different GitHub alternative. I speculate that within a few months, the communities will have settled on a single dominant one. I'm curious if it will be one of the existing ones, or something new. Perhaps a well-known company or individual will announce one; it will have good marketing, and dominate.

dewey

This has been going on for a decade, at the beginning it was projects moving to Gitlab now there's a lot of alternative projects but GitHub is still the only one that counts for discoverability. This is a very small minority of projects that move away from Github and it's way too early to declare GitHub doomed.

manbash

> I speculate that within a few months, the communities will have settled on a single dominant one.

The solutions on the roadmap are not centralized as GitHub. There is a real initiative to promote federation so we would not need to rely on one entity.

the__alchemist

I love this, and hope it works out this way. Maybe another way to frame it: In 2 years, what will the "Learn Python for Beginners" tutorials direct the user towards? Maybe there will not be a consensus, but my pattern-matching brain finds one!

tolerance

It looks like all that they’re doing is griping over frontends and interfaces to do all the custodial work other than version control (ie., all baked-in git provisions).

How do you speculate the candidacy for email.

diath

Isn't that pretty much GitLab? But then most people still prefer GitHub anyway.

hshdhdhj4444

Gitlab is worse than GitHub in every way.

At least GitHub adds new features over time.

Gitlab has been removing features in favor of more expensive plans even after explicitly saying they wouldn’t do so.

shortrounddev2

Gitlab works fine for me. Been using it at work for a few years and recently moved all my personal repos there

the__alchemist

Gitlab is part of the reason I'm thinking along these lines: It has been around for a while, as a known, reasonably popular alternative to GitHub. So, I expected the announcement to be "We moved to GitLab", Yet, what I observe is "We moved to CodeHouse" or "We moved to Source-Base" The self-hosting here with mirrors to two one I'm not familiar with is another direction.

shortrounddev2

I think people are wary of moving to gitlab because its a similarly large platform and dont want to repeat their mistakes

blibble

gitlab has also gone full slop

ksec

>The most annoying problem is that the frontend barely works without JavaScript,

Not only did they spend years rewriting the frontend from Pjax to I think React? They also manage to lost customer because of it.

SoKamil

GitHub frontend is mostly still their own [1] Web Components based library. They use Turbo to do client side reloading. They have small islands of React based views like Projects view or reworked Pull Request review. The thing is, even if you disable JavaScript, sites still load sloow. Try it yourself. Frontend code doesn’t seem to be the bottleneck.

[1] https://github.blog/engineering/architecture-optimization/ho...

superkuh

>frontend barely works without JavaScript, ... In the past, it used to gracefully degrade without enforcing JavaScript, but now it doesn't.

And the github frontend developers are aware of these accessibility problems (via the forums and bug reports). They just don't care anymore. They just want to make the site appear to work at first glance which is why index pages are actual text in html but nothing else is.

simonw

I'd love to hear the inside story of GitHub's migration of their core product features to React.

It clearly represents a pretty seismic cultural change within the company. GitHub was my go-to example of a sophisticated application that loaded fast and didn't require JavaScript for well over a decade.

The new React stuff is sluggish even on a crazy fast computer.

My guess is that the "old guard" who made the original technical decisions all left, and since it's been almost impossible to hire a frontend engineer since ~2020 or so that wasn't a JavaScript/React-first developer the weight of industry fashion became too much to resist.

But maybe I'm wrong and they made a technical decision to go all-in on heavy JavaScript features that was reasoned out by GitHub veterans and accompanied by rock solid technical justification.

GitHub have been very transparent about their internal technical decisions in the past. I'd love to see them write about this transition.

simonw

In answer to my own question about in-depth decision making, I just found this presentation from February 2025 by seven-year GitHub veteran Joel Hawksley: https://hawksley.org/2025/02/10/lessons-from-5-years-of-ui-a...

Relevant quote:

> But beyond accessibility and availability, there is also a growing expectation of GitHub being more app-like.

> The first case of this was when we rebuilt GitHub projects. Customers were asking for features well beyond our existing feature set. More broadly, we are seeing other companies in our space innovate with more app-like experiences.

> Which has led us to adoption React. While we don’t have plans to rewrite GitHub in React, we are building most new experiences in React, especially when they are app-like.

> We made this decision a couple of years ago, and since then we’ve added about 250 React routes that serve about half of the average pages used by a given user in a week.

It then goes on to talk about how mobile is the new baseline and GitHub needed to build interfaces that felt more like mobile apps.

(Personally I think JavaScript-heavy React code is a disaster on mobile since it's so slow to load on the median (Android) device. I guess GitHub's core audience are more likely to have powerful phones?)

blibble

github is a tool used where code is written: on desktop computers

no-one cares about the github mobile experience

microsoft making the windows 8 mistake all over again

baiwl

Having to enable javascript to see a website is not an accessibility problem according to WCAG.

egorfine

Fixing accessibility problems won't make shareholders happy while forcing AI down our throats will.