Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

blog.gitea.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 187 posts

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#31

Post by lbotos »

girvo wrote: post #20
phinnaeus wrote: post #12

If the author of this blogpost is reading this and wondering why the link in the post didn't render properly: > (their move to using Gitea)[ https://code.blender.org/2022/07/gitea-diaries-part-1/ ] it's because you switched up which braces go where for a markdown link. should be [text](link)

I constantly make that mistake. I don't know why, I simply can't seem to get the muscle memory right for some reason, and I always do ()[] first.

I always remember it as alphabetical order, brackets then parens, b then p.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#32

Post by rapnie »

hpaavola wrote: post #30

The development of Robot Framework(1) was originally paid by Nokia, but then things happened and Nokia decided not to continue doing that anymore. The main developer of Robot Framework and few companies using RF heavily understood that something had to be done, so Robot Framework Foundation(2) was formed. RF Foundation has membership fees, it arranges RF conferences etc. which allows RF Foundation to pay for the deve…

This is comparable to how Codeberg [0] is organized, which is also based on Gitea and one of the larger contributors upstream. Yet the number of members is tiny in comparison to their person base and growth. According to their latest numbers [1]:

> We are hosting 42010 repositories, created and maintained by 34042 users. Compared to one month ago, this is an organic growth rate of +3372 repositories (+8.7% month-over-month) and +2271 users (+7.1%).

And further on:

> Codeberg e.V. has 246 members in total, these are 175 members with active voting rights and 69 supporting members, and 2 honorary members.

[0] https://codeberg.org

[1] https://blog.codeberg.org/letter-from-codeberg-hackathon-tra...

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#34

Post by leppr »

remram wrote: post #13
slbtty wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't even mention a single thing about crypto?

They mention "a decentralized autonomous organization" which is a blockchain invention (a "smart contract" thingie): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organ...

The term DAO as it's used now is orthogonal to blockchain and crypto.

It's mostly a term to describe codified governance/community systems. There may be point systems implemented via crypto tokens, but in the vast majority of cases those would be better implemented on centralized ledgers since there's someone with centralized control over either the token issuance, the communication channels, or other essential resources.

If they were developed now, Stack Overflow and Wikipedia would be considered DAOs.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#35

Post by stonogo »

leppr wrote: post #34
remram wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They mention "a decentralized autonomous organization" which is a blockchain invention (a "smart contract" thingie): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organ...

The term DAO as it's used now is orthogonal to blockchain and crypto. It's mostly a term to describe codified governance/community systems. There may be point systems implemented via crypto tokens, but in the vast majority of cases those would be better implemented on centralized ledgers since there's someone with centralized control over either the token issuance, the communication channels, or other essential resou…

That would just indicate the term 'DAO' doesn't mean anything at all.

I'm unable to find an actual example of anything calling itself a DAO which doesn't also play with cryptocurrency tokens, so I'm pretty sure the term isn't used outside of that fanbase.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#37

Post by hrbf »

Gitea is a great piece of software. In fact, when starting out with self hosting, I found it to be a very capable solution with a small footprint.

Over time I realized: I don’t need to be able to merge pull requests and do code reviews in a web interface. Nowadays I’m invested in a plain Git/SSH setup with cgit as a web frontend and email patches.

It never breaks, is as secure as your server is and does everything you usually need, including user permissions.

The `git am`-based workflow is less than popular outside of FreeBSD, Linux kernel development and SourceHut though. Depending on your environment, if used in a work setting, your colleagues may balk.

That being said and given the existing enterprise users of Gitea, it’s entirely natural to eventually offer solutions tailored to their use, like SSO. I wish them the best for building towards a sustainable future while staying true to their core values.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#39

Post by trevyn »

rapnie wrote: post #32
hpaavola wrote: post #30

The development of Robot Framework(1) was originally paid by Nokia, but then things happened and Nokia decided not to continue doing that anymore. The main developer of Robot Framework and few companies using RF heavily understood that something had to be done, so Robot Framework Foundation(2) was formed. RF Foundation has membership fees, it arranges RF conferences etc. which allows RF Foundation to pay for the deve…

This is comparable to how Codeberg [0] is organized, which is also based on Gitea and one of the larger contributors upstream. Yet the number of members is tiny in comparison to their person base and growth. According to their latest numbers [1]: > We are hosting 42010 repositories, created and maintained by 34042 users. Compared to one month ago, this is an organic growth rate of +3372 repositories (+8.7% month-over…

To be fair, they don't exactly make it low-friction to become a member:

> Membership fees are debited by means of SEPA direct debit. Please email to contact@codeberg.org for other transfer methods.

Post reply on HN