We need issues, pull requests, comments, milestones, wiki, etc... all to be decentralized. No reason this stuff cannot be modeled using existing Git objects.
GitHub, GitLab and BitBucket are extremely similar. Almost 100% overlap, you could use the lowest common denominator between the 3 and you'd still have 95% of the features.
2. Actually building real-world implementations of "Issues, pull requests, comments, milestones, wiki, etc..." requires top-tier engineer[ing] time and energy to build and maintain. The current Git-on-steroids-aaS approach provides a very successful way to fund that undeniable cost.
I don't think it is wrong to then choose to have a centralized workflow on top of it. There are tradeoffs for either one, so choose what works best for your team.
For example, I couldn't imagine trying to onboard new client employees to a project without having some sort of centralized single-point-of-truth repository. Getting them to grok GitHub (and friends) is hard enough, sometimes.
https://www.fossil-scm.org/ pretty much does this.
"Fossil stores its objects in a relational (SQLite) database file"
I don't see git reaching beyond what it does right now, but a few others do, though they all involve a learning curve.
That's the easy part.
The hard part is discovery and keeping stuff like teams and moderation when you decentralize it. Advancements in Blockchain-tech, IPFS and similar will make this viable soonish-ly, but I think we are not quite there yet from a technological standpoint.
Has anyone got some advice for pain-free migration to GitLab or GitHub?
And now I can't access my repositories..
Not happy.
And I presume macOS? If Linux, X11 can do some interesting hacks with scaling and panning. (`xrandr --output ____ --scale` and `xrandr --output ____ --panning`)
Edit: / works, repos don't
git clone https://username@bitbucket.org/organization/repo.git
so you can probably still get by. Just the website is down.