Live data from Hacker News

Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

codeberg.org

81–82 of 82 posts

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forgejo is a community-run fork because the project should not be owned by a for-profit company.

why fork gitea and not gogs? is gitea "better" than the former?

The people starting forgejo were working on and with gitea before. With that I suppose the question is "Why fork anything but gitea?"

Re: Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea

#82
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the first time I hear of Woodpecker https://woodpecker-ci.org/ And I thought I knew the CI/CD ecosystem fairly well. Now I learned that it's a fork of Drone https://www.drone.io/ Oh, the irony.

You should try it, Codeberg uses it for their public CI/CD

Why should Gitea/Forejo lock themselves into a CI product such as Woodpecker, which could, like Drone, be purchased out?

Creating standards would be better, but in the lack of, a closely tied CI/CD or runner or whatever would be sufficient.

Right now, even the Gitea/Gogs/Forgejo ecosystem is fragmented. The latter fork exists, but I don't see how it's different from Foregjo and I have no inclination to believe that it will be optimised for codeberg's use case beyond others, but now I do ask - if Gitea implements functionality such as CICD / run pipelines, will Forgejo keep that or strip it out of their fork, if they maintain upstream syncs?

Is there even a document about what the product aims are? If they're just going to maintain Gitea sync without adding functionality, why should I even look at it, which is likely to fall out of sync with Gitea?

Post reply on HN