Skip to main content

GitHub repositories are still limited to 1GB

GitHub repositories are still limited to 1GB

I’m trying to help out one of the #googleplusexodus #3dprinting communities, makers of Eric Lien’s HercuLien and Eustathios printers, archive years of information onto a static site to preserve it. It’s about 2GB of content, mostly images, but 7.3MB of text too, so not insignificant. It’s perfect for github pages, except:

1. GitHub still limits its repositories to 1GB total content

2. GitHub pages still don’t honor lfs, as of last report I found when it was marked won’t fix, and the answer was essentially “well don’t do that then.”...

Michael K Johnson at Diaspora.


https://joindiaspora.com/posts/97468970fe480136b105005056264835
https://joindiaspora.com/posts/97468970fe480136b105005056264835

Comments

  1. so, what about its competitors Atlassian Bitbucket and GitLab? ah, I see GL is discussed in TFA, but has issues with publication.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The advantage of Bitbucket over Github is Bitbucket charges by user while GitHub charges by repo. Self-hosted Gitlab is preferred by some.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had hoped that GitLab was going to be the solution!

    Yeah, the funny part is I don't even care about pushing the build out to be done in the cloud (github or gitlab model). I just want to host static content, and once the lights turn off here, no more updates will be required. Super-simple.

    Bitbucket might actually work, since it only does static content, and I expect Atlassian to keep it going for a long time. But I sure wasted time thinking gitlab was going to work.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Michael K Johnson converting it locally and then pushing it to the Internet Archive a solution perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jekyll creates sites that have absolute URLs for assets so it needs to have the base URL set. Not sure how that works for IA...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hashed content across repositories ;)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alan Cox if just repo size was my current problem, I know how to use git submodules to do precisely that.

    No, my current problem is much simpler. Just publishing a static site, where I'm doing it as a kindness for others and don't have a stake in paying for static hosting indefinitely. :/

    ReplyDelete
  8. Michael K Johnson Does this mean that the blogging business model remains a fundamental problem?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Edward Morbius seems to me like a separate and unrelated question.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Michael K Johnson Yes and no.

    For collectively-hosted options (corporate or group-hosted), finding some way of paying to keep the lights on is a concern. The costs are so low as to really not be addressable on a per-user basis (a matter of pennies, possibly a few dollars per person per year), though in aggregate they add up above about 1k - 10k members.

    For individuals, the prospect of having to maintain and sustain multiple vendor relationships just to keep content available is also a risk. Many people are now living paycheck to paycheck, there's the vendor-relations-proliferation problem (many of us now maintain dozens, in cases hundreds, of such relationships), and the risks of payment interruption are high. Systems established when the Internet was the domain (so to speak) of a few large and well-endowed institutions fare poorly when scaled to billions, often in precarious or unpredictable circumstances.

    I'm actually convinced that this is a major dimension of the Net and Web as they've emerged.

    Systems for collectivising interest -- ISPs, government-based systems (think Minitel, in France, though postal and phone services are options, as are library and educational facilities), various nonprofit / informal groups, etc., are all potential directions. And there needn't be just one such, nor does private / commercial sector support have to be entirely ruled out. But it's problematic at scale.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

New comments on this blog are moderated. If you do not have a Google identity, you are welcome to post anonymously. Your comments will appear here after they have been reviewed. Comments with vulgarity will be rejected.

”go"