GitLab was known to be a resource hog not too long ago. I cannot comment on its current state, as I don’t use it, but someone I know has to maintain an instance with a few developers and they have a cronjob to kill the system and reboot it every once in a while because GitLab eats the system if not restarted every once in a while…
lemmy.bb obviously!
You don’t seem to be a developer :)
I have been a developer for over 10 years now.
If you mix them with general discussions your entire project cycle management system breaks as you can’t have clear milestones etc. with forever open “issues” that are not issues but discussions.
I don’t see why an issue must be assigned to a milestone, so I don’t see how an issue can break any lifecycle.
An issues is usually a bug report or similar
Usually? And when it is not?
See, I don’t see any reasons why a feature discussion shouldn’t be an issue. “Issue” is just a fancy name for “Discussion”, isn’t it? So basically, these are all some kind of linear or tree-style discussion of some specific topic. There’s nothing more to it, is there?
So I don’t see why they should be seperate at all. Differentiation can be done via tags, labels, … or whatever you’d like to call it. That’s there already of course.
I fully agree… Unfortunately sometimes it is not possible to have commandline merges, because that would mean that someone has push access… But for some projects that’s not possible, especially if two parties work on the same Project and some form of automation is in place (for example Bors/ a merge bot).
How about switching to https://www.opensourcealternative.to/ ?