[1]Skip to content[2] Tim Hårek • [3]Blog • [4]About • [5]More… 1. [6]Index 2. [7]Blog 3. [8]Switching to SourceHut Builds [9][10](Photo)[11]tim@harek.no[12]PGP key Switching to SourceHut Builds Published December 8, 2022 Last updated June 18, 2023 2 minutes read Earlier this year in a post, [13]What should you choose for deploying your static websites?, I wrote about what CI/CD[^1] you should chose for your static websites. And I concluded on using just using git-hooks. Well, by the title of this post you've probably guessed that I'm indeed changing my mind. After using this workflow for a while for a few projects I've realized a few things. 1. I miss having proper version control for the testing, building and deploying steps. 2. It requires more effort to setup. 3. I need to manually configure notifications for when something goes wrong. There are probably more things, but these are the ones that have bothered me the most. For step #2 I made a shell-script, [14]git-hooks, so that I don't have to remember every intricate detail each the time. So why [15]SourceHut? [16]Last time I wrote about this topic I found out their tool is the easiest to configure and use in my opinion. They have support for hosting of static sites, and you also have access to a bunch of packages for the [17]different images they provide. Ben Busby's blogpost, [18]GitHub vs GitLab vs SourceHut, also helped me switch to SourceHut. A key difference between my git-hooks workflow vs SourceHut builds is speed, my git-hooks workflow took a few seconds, but with SourceHut it takes up to 1 minute. But I'm in no rush. As of writing I've moved my personal website over to SourceHut's build-system, and I've moved the website for the place I live ([19]my post about it) to it as well. This project didn't even use git-hooks, it used GitHub Actions. My plan is to move [20]Everyday Privacy over, which is using Vercel today. I also want to start adding more tests and checks to my other small projects, so that I can get notified if something doesn't pass after I've pushed to remote. I'm looking forward to using SourceHut more, I like how simple it is. It takes away a lot of unnecessary bits that other source-forges has. [^1]: Short for: Continuous Integration / Continuous Deployment Tagged with • [21]#cicd • [22]#devops • [23]#git • [24]#sourcehut 363 words [25]Reply via email Last deploy: 2024-10-23 • [26]Stats • [27]Privacy • [28]Connect • [29]Subscribe References: [1] https://timharek.no/blog/switching-to-sourcehut-builds#main [2] https://timharek.no/ [3] https://timharek.no/blog [4] https://timharek.no/about [5] https://timharek.no/more [6] https://timharek.no/ [7] https://timharek.no/blog [8] https://timharek.no/blog/switching-to-sourcehut-builds [9] https://timharek.no/ [10] https://timharek.no/.well-known/avatar?size=250&quality=90 [11] mailto:tim@harek.no [12] https://timharek.no/public-key.asc [13] https://timharek.no/blog/what-should-you-choose-for-deployment [14] https://github.com/timharek/git-hooks [15] https://sourcehut.org/ [16] https://timharek.no/blog/what-should-you-choose-for-deployment [17] https://man.sr.ht/builds.sr.ht/compatibility.md [18] https://benbusby.com/gh-vs-gl-vs-sh/ [19] https://timharek.no/blog/i-made-a-website-for-the-place-i-live/index [20] https://everyday-privacy.com/ [21] https://timharek.no/tags/cicd [22] https://timharek.no/tags/devops [23] https://timharek.no/tags/git [24] https://timharek.no/tags/sourcehut [25] mailto:tim@harek.no?subject=RE:%20Switching%20to%20SourceHut%20Builds [26] https://timharek.no/stats [27] https://timharek.no/privacy [28] https://timharek.no/connect [29] https://timharek.no/subscribe