[frankier]

This is the first part of #535

This was initially tool assisted with ChatGPT computer use, but it's had a full human pass.

I'm creating this as a draft pull request. @samumantha Any feedback before I finish off the rest?

[samumantha]

Thank you!

I would like to forward this request to @MaritJenssen .

She was interested in supporting this work and familiar with gitlab.

Also ping to @hemanadhan and @dianaiusan for awareness that this work is ongoing. Both are the potential future maintainers of this lesson.

[samumantha]

One general comment would be to please also add something on the new tab also to the instructor guide. Mention any potential pitfalls, which tab to choose for teaching, etc.

[MaritJenssen]

I think this looks good overall. But it is unclear to me how I can search for ingredients in the recipes (step 5). I could not figure out how to get to the "project search field". Maybe this can be made clearer before merging?

[frankier]

Hi @MaritJenssen. Sorry for the confusion about this. I saw your message saying you wanted to take this over which is okay but I needed to first finish the parts that I had part-done first. These are done now so what remains for you are the configuration, merging, and sharing sections.

I've requested a review from @mmesiti since he said he was interested in this but at any rate I'll merge this at the end of the day so you can base your changes on it.

[mmesiti]

Hi @MaritJenssen. Sorry for the confusion about this. I saw your message saying you wanted to take this over which is okay but I needed to first finish the parts that I had part-done first. These are done now so what remains for you are the configuration, merging, and sharing sections.

I've requested a review from @mmesiti since he said he was interested in this but at any rate I'll merge this at the end of the day so you can base your changes on it.

Do I have some more time to look at this?

[frankier]

@mmesiti Yes go ahead. I was mainly trying to rush to make sure I don't block @MaritJenssen s work but I'll hold off for now.

[github-actions]

📖 Preview of this branch: https://coderefinery.github.io/git-intro/branch/gitlab-browsing/

Built at 2026-09-15T10:14:12Z (artifact timestamp).

I think I resolved all parts of your review but it's still showing here -- I'm not sure why (it's not happened before when I've used GitHub reviews). Let me know if I missed something.

[mmesiti]

Observations:

1. Awesome and huge work...
2. Ideally GitHub -> GitHub/GitLab everywhere. But that's verbose and limiting. Most rigorous term would be probably "Forge". But that's probably a little niche?
3. in "Creating a copy of the repository by forking" the GitHub and GitLab tabs differ. The GitLab tab has 3 steps, where you have to choose the organization. This would also be the case in general on GitHub, but GitHub has a more sensible default that you don't have to touch.
4. I see no gitlab version for https://github.com/coderefinery/git-intro/blob/main/content/merging.md.? I guess this is going into another part? definitely not a blocker but some expectation management should be made explicit (And now, ladies and gentlemen, if you wanted to follow this lesson on GitLab, you're on your own! Good luck! .... Actually, why don't you make a PR?)
5. The Archaeology section: why not fork networkx on gitlab.com instead of a completely new repo? It looks to me like it would be a little easier to maintain. Anyway, great work has already been done!

[frankier]

1. Cheers!

2. See response in issue

3. True -- and there are a couple of places where I made the GitLab instructions a bit more detailed. I'm assuming the GitHub ones are fine and then just tried to make sure the GitLab ones didn't miss anything out.

4. Yeah good idea! A placeholder/signpost could be added. I'll put this in a follow up PR before the workshop.

5. I see what you mean and it crossed my mind but it seemed a bit artificial to start mirroring things -- as if GitLab is this weird thing that nobody actually uses. It's a little domain specific but I suppose my reasoning was that ase is a fairly popular package (0.5% as popular as networkx but I had already heard of it) which uses GitLab as its primary hosting and it's a scientific computing thing. Something that can always be revisited later if it turns out to be confusing I suppose.