Live data from Hacker News

Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

codeberg.org

71–80 of 82 posts

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#71
post #3
post #2

Is Gitea a for-profit project? What's wrong with that?

https://blog.gitea.io/2022/10/open-source-sustainment-and-th... Yeah looks like they are selling support, which I have no problem with. I actually recently set up Gitea and Drone together and it is a match made in heaven. I don't have a problem if open source developers try to monetize their work. I will likely try to do the same with a few projects in the future, lol

I also don't have a problem if open source developers try to monetize their work. In fact I think it's great, if done right. But context is important here.

In Gitea's case, I think this could have been done right, with the community's knowledge and involvement. But that's not what happened. Two of the three "elected owners" of the project effectively undertook a hostile takeover, transferring the ownership of the domains and trademarks to a secretive private company, without telling anyone until after the fact. I know people who were formerly active maintainers, and they were taken completely by surprise – even though it turns out that preparations for this had been ongoing behind closed doors for many months.

At first, I and many others thought it was perhaps a case of failures of communication, and were prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt. But after an open letter was signed by many community members, and the people behind Gitea Ltd had ample opportunity to improve the situation, they only dug their heels in and made things worse, and refused to answer questions beyond corporate-speak PR posts. It was at that point that the decision was taken to fork.

As a Gitea user and as someone who is excited about the forge ecosystem and the future of forge federation, I truly hope that Gitea as a community project continues to thrive, and that the company ultimately doesn't derail the community. Unfortunately, I am also very pessimistic about that being the reality, and so I think this fork is a very positive development.

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#72

While the seeming lack of communication from the Gitea owners (see the Gitea open letter) is a bit worrying, it does seem a bit premature to fork and potentially fragment the community before they've actually done anything.

Things being what they are, gitea is essentially the form, and this is the continuation of the existing open source model. Gitea(Tm) is trying to fragment the community by creating a company, but this fork is just about building a great open source product.

If anyone at Gitea(Tm) is seriously afraid of fragmenting the community they are free to contribute to the open source product just like everyone else, but the open source community is naturally not free to engage in anything on behalf of the company.

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#74
post #36

This is interesting but does codeberg dictate what projects are acceptable? From this post it seems that codeberg has an authoritarian vibe to the point where you can produce “wrong code”; https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/794#issuecomm... If that is the case I’ll stick with my self hosted gitlab.

> From this post it seems that codeberg has an authoritarian vibe to the point where you can produce “wrong code”;

This aged well. One of the mods has already threatened to ban someone who literally did nothing wrong.

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#75
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the clarification. I’m not a crypto dev or into crypto much but I’m not into the idea of banning people for “wrong code”, “wrong speak” or idealogical reasons so I’ll be sure to stay away from sourceHut, Ddevault and codeberg. Good luck to you none the less.

I share your concerns and principled stance. These ideological driven policies are akin to polices encouraging bookburnings in my eyes. Futile polices that do nothing but hurt those who perpetuate it and engage in it.

I don't know, i have a friend who went to the UK in 2015 to work on ready-made dropshipping website that they sold to influencers, and latter on the business shifted to ready-made shitcoins they sold to influencers, with "additionnal code" sold separately (throttle selling, and bypassing the throttle for example). I think the main solidity code was hosted on sourceforge, and this made me kind of boycott the website (i mean, i don't use it much anyway). I understand they need to make money, but hosting tools designed to create scams is a bit too much. I think they sold (or disbanded) the company last year, so i'm not sure if the product is still hosted there.

I guess that if you don't want to pay a moderation team who can read code, banning solidity code and crypto-related project is good enough.

I only wrote this as a counterpoint. i understand your stance, you don't want private company to support censorship. I don't really want that either, but i also don't want private companies to allow scam to be run on their plateforms, and to me, protecting less informed citizens is more important that protecting an ideological concept. It's a trade off for me, and i understand people who don't weigh things the same way.

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#76
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only everyone follows ddevault's advice and starts each project with AGPL, that way no company can steal the code.

So it’s stealing to use a license you don’t like? As an outsider, your posts throughout this thread come across as whiny, entitled m, and thoroughly self-serving.

No. Using a pushover license instead of the AGPL is like not locking your door, and using other people's free work in your own non-free product is stealing from the commons.

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#80
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it’s stealing to use a license you don’t like? As an outsider, your posts throughout this thread come across as whiny, entitled m, and thoroughly self-serving.

No. Using a pushover license instead of the AGPL is like not locking your door, and using other people's free work in your own non-free product is stealing from the commons.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN