Richard Eisenberg writes:
> As it turns out, it was the wiki that directly inspired this post. But I had
> noticed the problem previously and wanted to say this for some time.
>
> Yes, I should have clarified that I expect the charge to be recurring;
> pretend those figures are all per-year. If
As it turns out, it was the wiki that directly inspired this post. But I had
noticed the problem previously and wanted to say this for some time.
Yes, I should have clarified that I expect the charge to be recurring; pretend
those figures are all per-year. If the problem is the gitlab
Are you particularly noticing this on the wiki? That is known to be
slow as the implementation is quite hacky.
If you want to experience some real slowness, try browsing gitlab.com!
Cheers,
Matt
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 4:47 PM Brandon Allbery wrote:
>
> I rather suspect it'd be more like "per
I rather suspect it'd be more like "per some period" than a one-time fee,
and "$100/month" is rather harder than "$100".
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:20 AM Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> GitLab is sometimes a bit slow. I understand we host this ourselves, and
> faster is more expensive.
Hi all,
GitLab is sometimes a bit slow. I understand we host this ourselves, and faster
is more expensive. My question: how much more expensive? That is, if we throw
$100 at the problem, will gitlab be speedy? Will it take $1,000? $10,000? If
it's the first one, then let's just blast ahead. If
