I just have to say that I wrote my on hosting git service and eat my own stuff at gitbusiness.com
Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
111–120 of 385 posts
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#112The truth is that I publish OSS projects on GitHub because that's where the community is, and the issues/pull requests/discussions are a bonus.
If I just want to host my code, I can self host or use an SSH/SFTP server as a git remote, and that's usually what I do.
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#113I've been using a self-hosted forgejo (which Codeberg uses and maintains) instance for all of my non-work projects and it's been great. I don't miss GitHub at all. I also keep it accessible only from Tailscale so that AI crawlers and such can speedily make their way into the sun.
I went with gitea, but for the same general reasons. I like It has the option to mirror repos up to GitHub for the stuff I actually want to share with the world. Is there anything that made you choose forgejo specifically? I’m not eager to move platforms, but I know there’s more options that have popped up in the years since I first stood up my gitea instance.
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#114I 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…
CI needs good integration into the source forge. But I don't really perceive Github actions as a huge benefit over the times when everone just set up CircleCI or whatever. As long as it can turn PR checks red, yellow and green and has a link to the logs I'm happy The whole PR and code review experience is much more important to me. Github is striving to set a high bar, but is also hilariously bad in some ways. Simila…
[deleted]
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#115The truth is that I publish OSS projects on GitHub because that's where the community is, and the issues/pull requests/discussions are a bonus. If I just want to host my code, I can self host or use an SSH/SFTP server as a git remote, and that's usually what I do.
> I publish OSS projects on GitHub because that's where the community is
And so we go, forever in circles, until enough of us move to other platforms regardless of where the existing community is. Just like how GitHub found its community in the early days, when most people (afaik) was using SourceForge, if anything.
"The community" will always remain on GitHub, if everyone just upload code to where "the community" already is. If enough of us stop using GitHub by default, and instead use something else, eventually "the community" will be there too, but it is somewhat of a chicken-and-egg problem, I admit.
I myself workaround this by dropping the whole idea that I'm writing software for others, and I only write it for myself, so if people want it, go to my personal Gitea instance and grab it if you want, I couldn't care less about stars and "publicity" or whatever people nowadays care about. But I'm also lucky enough to already have a network, it might require other's to build their network on GitHub first, then also be able to do something similar, and it'll all work out in the end.
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#116Codeberg is great, but I really miss Octobox.
I can't imagine using GitHub without Octobox; it's just impossible to keep track of all the notifications by email.
Unfortunately, Octobox doesn't support GitHub, so I've no idea how to follow projects, even the ones I really want to contribute to.
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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/
From their FAQ: > If you do not contribute to free/libre software (or if it is limited to your personal homepage) , and we feel like you only abuse Codeberg for storing your commercial projects or media backups, we might get unhappy about that. Emphasis mine. This isn't about if it's technically possible (it certainly is), it's whether or not it's allowed by their platform policies. Their page publishing feature seem…
That FAQ snippet is insane to me. Maybe it's a cultural thing but I'd never do business with a company that has implicit threats in their ToS based on something so completely arbitrary.
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#118Repo hosting is the kind of thing that ought to be distributed/federated. The underlying protocol (git) already has the cryptographic primitives that decouples trust in the commit tree (GPG or SSH signing) with trust in the storage service (i.e. github/codeberg/whatever). All you need to house centrally is some SSH and/or gpg key server and some means of managing namespaces which would benefit from federation as well…
> Repo hosting is the kind of thing that ought to be distributed/federated.
Hence Tangled and ForgeFed (which I believe is integrating in Forejo)
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#119even better, selfhost your own gitea instance
How do other people open pull/merge requests for your projects?
Honest question: do you want them to? Most of us aren't running high-profile OSS projects, and drive-by PRs are a pretty widespread complaint about GitHub's model of opensource
Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people
#120I 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…
> just have some sane rules and make everyone follow them (like run unit tests before submitting a PR)
and thus you discover the value of CI