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

Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

code.blender.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–58 of 58 posts

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#51

Post by cturtle »

techknowlogick wrote: post #45
cturtle wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did! I did the Google Summer of Code twice with Blender and ever since I find myself preferring the patch workflow of Phabricator over the merge/pull request found elsewhere. I am comfortable with both, but phabricator just clicked with me better

What was your experience like with GSOC? Gitea has applied to it this year, and are hoping to be able to make it a good experience for any contributor that is matched (hopefully we are accepted as well).

GSoC was a great experience. It was my first time planning a major contribution to an open source project. It would have been much more challenging for me without the help of my mentor and the other core contributors, so it is important to have a good support system for any involved.

My projects were focused on user interface improvements, so I also spent a lot of time gathering feedback from users. It was really valuable for me to learn how to get feedback at different stages of the development cycle, and also to learn how to filter the good from the bad feedback.

I hope Gitea is accepted!

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#52

Post by RamblingCTO »

lucideer wrote: post #20

This is an interesting move in the context of the recent kerfuffle around Gitea - context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33749757 I wonder whether this was part of discussion on the migrating within the Blender team or whether their migration just started before the Gitea org-change. --- Off-topic but it's also funny that the Phabricator fork is Phorge & the Gitea fork is Forgejo...

On the topic of gitea, I rummaged through the thread and it seems they want to make a decision in the first months of this year. I'm not sure these people are fit to run such a platform if they don't understand the problem with "we'll ban code doing xyz because we don't like it" for such a project. I was really looking forward to codeberg, but I also have a bunch of infosec stuff in my repos, including malware/PoC's etc. but I don't want to risk getting banned.

We need something like self-hosted gitea plus fediverse-driven socials mimicking github.

/edit: there is actually work being done by forgefed.org, radicle.xyz and forgejo is implementing federation here: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/59

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#53

Post by account42 »

> The Git repositories have changed location.

> The development branch is now named main instead of master.

If only we could avoid such pointless downstream-affecting changes. Cool URI's shouldn't change. We have the technology. And doing such changes to satisfy manufactured outrage is even more sad.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#54

Post by lucideer »

RamblingCTO wrote: post #52
lucideer wrote: post #20

This is an interesting move in the context of the recent kerfuffle around Gitea - context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33749757 I wonder whether this was part of discussion on the migrating within the Blender team or whether their migration just started before the Gitea org-change. --- Off-topic but it's also funny that the Phabricator fork is Phorge & the Gitea fork is Forgejo...

On the topic of gitea, I rummaged through the thread and it seems they want to make a decision in the first months of this year. I'm not sure these people are fit to run such a platform if they don't understand the problem with "we'll ban code doing xyz because we don't like it" for such a project. I was really looking forward to codeberg, but I also have a bunch of infosec stuff in my repos, including malware/PoC's…

The comments on codeberg aren't really relevant in this thread - codeberg is a hosting platform, any policies they implemented would apply to accounts on their platform only, not to self-hosting users of gitea/forgejo/whichever.

That said, as long as the underlying software is self-hostable, I actually think platforms taking a curatorial approach is pretty cool. E.g. Mastodon instances do this with moderation, but also make it easy to have multiple accounts on different instances for different purposes.

I already do this with git hosts so I can see it working well.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#55

Post by RamblingCTO »

lucideer wrote: post #54
RamblingCTO wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the topic of gitea, I rummaged through the thread and it seems they want to make a decision in the first months of this year. I'm not sure these people are fit to run such a platform if they don't understand the problem with "we'll ban code doing xyz because we don't like it" for such a project. I was really looking forward to codeberg, but I also have a bunch of infosec stuff in my repos, including malware/PoC's…

The comments on codeberg aren't really relevant in this thread - codeberg is a hosting platform, any policies they implemented would apply to accounts on their platform only, not to self-hosting users of gitea/forgejo/whichever. That said, as long as the underlying software is self-hostable, I actually think platforms taking a curatorial approach is pretty cool. E.g. Mastodon instances do this with moderation, but al…

Well, as far as I understand, the fork forgejo is done by codeberg [1] so I see it as relevant. Wasn't that the commotion you meant?

But yeah I agree, federated gitea/forgejo and then I wouldn't care about their ToS because I could roll my own. Nowadays code-hosting is so social that I would declare it even a social network in a kind of way. Really looking forward to the federation of gitea/forgejo!

> I already do this with git hosts so I can see it working well.

Can you elaborate?

[1] https://blog.codeberg.org/codeberg-launches-forgejo.html

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#56

Post by lucideer »

RamblingCTO wrote: post #55
lucideer wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comments on codeberg aren't really relevant in this thread - codeberg is a hosting platform, any policies they implemented would apply to accounts on their platform only, not to self-hosting users of gitea/forgejo/whichever. That said, as long as the underlying software is self-hostable, I actually think platforms taking a curatorial approach is pretty cool. E.g. Mastodon instances do this with moderation, but al…

Well, as far as I understand, the fork forgejo is done by codeberg [1] so I see it as relevant. Wasn't that the commotion you meant? But yeah I agree, federated gitea/forgejo and then I wouldn't care about their ToS because I could roll my own. Nowadays code-hosting is so social that I would declare it even a social network in a kind of way. Really looking forward to the federation of gitea/forgejo! > I already do th…

> Well, as far as I understand, the fork forgejo is done by codeberg [1] so I see it as relevant. Wasn't that the commotion you meant?

Forgejo was started independent of Codeberg - Codeberg later became the project's "custodian".

From the Forgejo site:

> we are very proud that Codeberg e.V. has decided to become our project’s custodian. Codeberg e.V. is a non-profit organization with a stellar reputation, that is dedicated to the success of the Free Software movement. They provide software development services to FOSS projects at Codeberg.org. They are rapidly growing and hosting more than 50,000 code repositories for about 40,000 people. Not only will Codeberg take care of the Forgejo domain names and trademarks, but the organization will use Forgejo as the basis for their own services, instead of Gitea.

Full post at: https://forgejo.org/2022-12-15-hello-forgejo/

> Can you elaborate?

I just mean that Git is a distributed model that supports multiple remotes. Having different hosts for different things is not a use-case that's unsupported or difficult with the current software.

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#57

Post by rurban »

And this blog post describes their adventure: https://code.blender.org/2022/07/gitea-diaries-part-1/

Which includes the famous start of the gitea shitstorm: "And, quite significantly, we’re in the finishing stages of having a support agreement with the Gitea project to have them support us in our migration by funding work on missing features, code and bugfixes that will be available 100% to Gitea users under Gitea’s MIT license."

Re: Blender moves from Phabricator to Gitea

#58

Post by RamblingCTO »

lucideer wrote: post #56
RamblingCTO wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as far as I understand, the fork forgejo is done by codeberg [1] so I see it as relevant. Wasn't that the commotion you meant? But yeah I agree, federated gitea/forgejo and then I wouldn't care about their ToS because I could roll my own. Nowadays code-hosting is so social that I would declare it even a social network in a kind of way. Really looking forward to the federation of gitea/forgejo! > I already do th…

> Well, as far as I understand, the fork forgejo is done by codeberg [1] so I see it as relevant. Wasn't that the commotion you meant? Forgejo was started independent of Codeberg - Codeberg later became the project's "custodian". From the Forgejo site: > we are very proud that Codeberg e.V. has decided to become our project’s custodian. Codeberg e.V. is a non-profit organization with a stellar reputation, that is ded…

Got it, thank you for clarifying!
Post reply on HN