Comment

Comment by ddevault

I know I'm biased here (full disclosure: sourcehut guy here), but I really hope you'll bring that goal even lower. I recently did a comparison between GitHub, GitLab, and SourceHut on the same "worst-case" page:

https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/linux/tree/master/arch/arm/boot/...

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/arch/arm/boot/...

https://gitlab.com/ddevault/linux/-/tree/master/arch/arm/boo...

                    cold cache     warm cache
    git.sr.ht:      1.4s     72K   1.4s     48K

    github.com:     3.3s    635K   3.0s    317K*

    gitlab.com:     3.1s   1300K   1.6s     58K+

    * Hides half of the files
    + Only the initial load, it loads a bunch of stuff with JS to keep
      populating the page afterwards, and has severe performance issues
      simply using the page (on Chromium, it was straight up unusable on
      qutebrowser)
Even after the page loads, for me it's impossible to use. On a more forgiving "best-case" page, GitLab has poor performance:

https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/scdoc/tree/master/src

https://github.com/ddevault/scdoc/tree/master/src

https://gitlab.com/ddevault/scdoc/-/tree/master/src

                    cold cache     warm cache
    git.sr.ht:      296ms    28K   198ms      4K

    github.com:     572ms   360K   629ms     36K

    gitlab.com:    1310ms  1311K  1110ms     16K
You should definitely make performance a core focus IMO.
parent ddevault 6 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton