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

Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

unterwaditzer.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 385 posts

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#41

Post by wongarsu »

systems wrote: post #9
InitialPhase55 wrote: post #3

Might be more difficult for people with private repos, as I recall Codeberg doesn't like private repos on their platform.

I just noticed this, they dont allow private repos (with few exceptions) I wonder why they dont just offer unlimited private repos for (reasonably) paid accounts , I think maybe a 40 dollar per year (or 4 dollar monthly), is low and encouraging , and should be welcomed by many , I hope they consider it

Codeberg is a German nonprofit. To keep their tax-advantaged status, anything they do has to follow the purpose established in their bylaws. That purpose is "to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultural Works) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and their documentation in selfless work to enable equal opportunities regarding the access to knowledge and education. Furthermore, this also intends to raise awareness for the social and philosophical questions interconnected with this."

I imagine they would argue that private repositories do not follow this purpose, as they are neither free content nor FOSS. I believe you could argue that charging a modest fee for private repositories to finance the hosting of FOSS repositories is in line with the purpose, but you get on thinner ice with that. It could quickly make them appear more like a company than like a nonprofit

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#42

Post by fhennig »

mrbluecoat wrote: post #15

Is there a "Moving open source search from GitHub to XYZ, for lazy people"? When I'm looking for solutions to problems that open source might be able to solve, I find the fracturing of code hosting platforms an annoyance.

Can you elaborate what the problem is? IMO hosting and search are quite decoupled, why not just search for "open source solution to problem XYZ" in your favorite search engine?

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#43

Post by mfenniak »

b00ty4breakfast wrote: post #32
999900000999 wrote: post #13

GitHub gives you a lot for "free". In exchange they'll have no problem harvesting your data, and it would really surprise me if they aren't training on private repos too. I guess you can opt out and if they're opt out doesn't work oh well. On the other hand Codeberg doesn't let you create private repositories at all. So Copilot could still legally scrape your open source Codeberg repos. I don't see much of a point fo…

>On the other hand Codeberg doesn't let you create private repositories at all. are you sure about that? I'm fairly certain my repos on codeberg are all private but I could be mistaken.

It is kinda incorrect and kinda correct. Codeberg allows you to create private repositories. However, their rules are clear that the intent of private repositories must be in support of Free software projects: https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#how-about-pri..., which for many people is effectively not allowing private repositories.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#44

Post by usrbinenv »

woodruffw wrote: post #11

I think evaluating alternatives to GitHub is going to become increasingly important over the coming years. At the same time, I think these kinds of migrations discount how much GitHub has changed the table stakes/raised the bar for what makes a valuable source forge: it's simply no longer reasonable to BYO CI or accept one that can't natively build for a common set of end-user architectures. This on its own makes me…

I don't understand the hype around CI and that it's supposedly impossible to run something like that without Git, let alone Github. Like sure, a nice interface is fine, but I can do with a simpler one. I don't need a million features, because what is CI (in practice today, not in theory)? It's just a set of commands that run on a remote machine and then the output of those commands is displayed in the browser and it also influences what other commands may or may not run. What exactly is the big deal here? It can probably be built internally if needed and it certainly doesn't need to depend on git so much - git can trigger it via hooks, but that's it?

I think the real problem is we were sold all these complex processes that supposedly deliver better results, while in reality for most people and orgs it's just cargo culting, like with Kubernetes, for example. We can get rid of 90% of them and be just fine. You easily get away without any kind of CI in teams of less than 5-7 people I would argue - just have some sane rules and make everyone follow them (like run unit tests before submitting a PR).

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#47

Post by real_joschi »

noirscape wrote: post #14

I don't dislike Codeberg inherently, but it's not a "true" GitHub replacement. It can handle a good chunk of GitHub repositories (namely those for well established FOSS projects looking to have everything a proper capital P project has), but if you're just looking for a generic place to put your code projects that aren't necessarily intended for public release and support (ie. random automation scripts, scraps of con…

> They also don't want to host your homepage, so if GitHub Pages is why you used GitHub, they are not a replacement.

https://docs.codeberg.org/codeberg-pages/

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#48

Post by CuriouslyC »

prmoustache wrote: post #40
woodruffw wrote: post #11

I think evaluating alternatives to GitHub is going to become increasingly important over the coming years. At the same time, I think these kinds of migrations discount how much GitHub has changed the table stakes/raised the bar for what makes a valuable source forge: it's simply no longer reasonable to BYO CI or accept one that can't natively build for a common set of end-user architectures. This on its own makes me…

> it's simply no longer reasonable to BYO CI Why? I know plenty of teams which are fine with repo and CI being separate tools as long as there is integration between the 2.

Actions are bad, but they're free (to start) and just good enough that they're useful to set up something quick and dirty, and tempt you to try and scale it for a little while.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#49

Post by arcanemachiner »

throwa356262 wrote: post #21

Codeberg is not a 1-1 replacement for github/gitlab but for many people it is a better option. I really wish there was a way to support with them a smaller amount then €24. I dont use codeberg myself but I really want to support them.

I send them a couple bucks a month via Liberapay. I'm on mobile and short on time, but you can customize the donation amount easily.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#50

Post by dspillett »

embedding-shape wrote: post #16
INTPenis wrote: post #5

Lazy has nothing to do with it, codeberg simply doesn't work. Most of my friends who use codeberg are staunch cloudflare-opponents, but cloudflare is what keeps Gitlab alive. Fact of life is that they're being attacked non-stop, and need some sort of DDoS filter. Codeberg has that anubis thing now I guess? But they still have downtime, and the worst thing ever for me as a developer is having the urge to code and not…

Maybe I'm too old school, but both GitHub and Codeberg for me are asyncronous "I want to send/share the code somehow", not "my active workspace I require to do work". But reading > the worst thing ever for me as a developer is having the urge to code and not being able to access my remote. Makes it seem like GitHub/Codeberg has to be online for you to be able to code, is that really the case? If so, how does that hap…

> Makes it seem like GitHub/Codeberg has to be online for you to be able to code, is that really the case?

I can understand that work with other active contributors, but I agree with you that it is a daft state of affairs for a solo or mostly-solo project.

Though if you have your repo online even away from the big places, it will get hit by the scrapers and you will end up with admin to do because of that, even if it doesn't block your normal workflow because your main remote is not public.

Post reply on HN