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

191–200 of 385 posts

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#191

Post by marginalia_nu »

Tharre wrote: post #129
marginalia_nu wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone actually scraping git repos would probably just do a 'git clone'. Crawling git hosts is extremely expensive, as git servers have always been inadvertent crawler traps. They generate a URL for every version of every file on every commit and every branch and tag, and if that wasn't enough, n(n+1)/2 git diffs for every file on every commit it has exited on. Even a relatively small git repo with a few hundred file…

And yet, it's exactly what all the AI companies are doing. However much it costs them in server costs and good will seems to be worth less to them then the engineering time to special case the major git web UIs.

I doubt they're actually interested in the git repos.

From the shape of the traffic it just looks like a poorly implemented web crawler. By default, a crawler that does not take measures to actively avoid git hosts will get stuck there and spend days trying to exhaust the links of even a single repo.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#192

Post by tjoff »

radlad wrote: post #180
tjoff wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(SSG - static site generator) I mean, it is arguably much easier to just write the HTML page and upload it with FTP and everyone can see it. I never understood why github became a popular place to host your site in the first place.

Because it doesn't require you to run an HTTP server, FTP server, or install an FTP client.

Finding an HTTP+FTP server was easier than finding github. Your OS probably has a FTP client installed already, but finding another one is easier than finding and most definitely easier than learning git.

And if you already knew how to write/make HTML you'd for sure already know all of that too.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#193

Post by knocte »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #48
prmoustache wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Exactly. Any github alternative needs to consume same GithubActions syntax OOTB I'm afraid.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#194

Post by GalaxySnail »

ponkpanda wrote: post #34

Repo 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…

git-bug[1] looks promising, but I haven't tried it.

[1] https://github.com/git-bug/git-bug

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#195

Post by NewJazz »

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…

Unfortunately I don't think there's really an answer to that conundrum that doesn't involve just spinning up your own git server and accepting all the operational overhead that comes with it.

Hmm all that operational overhead... Of an ssh server? If you literally just want a place to push some code, then that really isn't that hard.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#196

Post by r14c »

Aperocky wrote: post #177
ramon156 wrote: post #173

Instead of "moving", let's at least have some mirrors up. Mirror all your repos to CB, make a FOSS tool to do this automagically for you. Let users be able to just click a button and boom, mirror. The goal is to get at least a % available on CB, then we can think about where the community is

Why didn't codeberg make this FOSS tool though? Seems natural they should.

They disabled the mirrors feature because they didn't want a bunch of accounts mirroring large repos and doing nothing else.

Forgejo does support mirrors, just not codeberg.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#197

Post by noirscape »

tjoff wrote: post #176
noirscape wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which makes it not really a suitable replacement for GitHub, which is my entire point. Keep in mind, I'm not saying Codeberg is bad , but it's terms of use are pretty clear in the sense that they only really want FOSS and anyone who has something other than FOSS better look elsewhere. GitHub allowed you to basically put up anything that's "yours" and the license wasn't really their concern - that isn't the case with…

(SSG - static site generator) I mean, it is arguably much easier to just write the HTML page and upload it with FTP and everyone can see it. I never understood why github became a popular place to host your site in the first place.

> I never understood why github became a popular place to host your site in the first place.

Easy: it was free, it was accessible to people that couldn't spend money for a hosting provider (read: high schoolers) and didn't impose arbitrary restrictions on what you were hosting.

Back then, your options as a high school student were basically to either try and reskin a closed off platform as much as you could (Tumblr could do that, but GitHub Pages also released in the time period where platforms were cracking down on all user customization larger than "what is my avatar") or to accept that the site you wanted to publish your stuff on could disappear at any moment the sketchy hosting provider that provided you a small amount of storage determined your bandwidth costs meant upselling you on the premium plan.

GitHub didn't impose those restrictions in exchange for being a bit less interactive when it came to publishing things (so no such thing as a comment section without using Disqus or something like that, and chances are you didn't need the comments anyways so win-win) That's why it got a lot more popular than just using an FTP server.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#198

Post by mejutoco »

NewJazz wrote: post #195
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…

Unfortunately I don't think there's really an answer to that conundrum that doesn't involve just spinning up your own git server and accepting all the operational overhead that comes with it. Hmm all that operational overhead... Of an ssh server? If you literally just want a place to push some code, then that really isn't that hard.

In case anybody is interested, having a bare git repo on a server is as easy as:

    # locally
    ssh git@example.com
    
    # server
    mkdir repo.git  
    cd repo.git  
    git --bare init
    
    # locally
    git remote add origin ssh://git@example.com/home/git/repo.git  
    git push origin master
P.S. I know it does not have the same features as github

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#199

Post by era-epoch »

germandiago wrote: post #190
shimman wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems fair to me, they're a nonprofit that exists in our lived reality and not an abusive monopolist that can literally throw a billion dollars to subsidize loss leaders. All it shows the world is why there needs to be a VAT like tax against US digital services to help drive a public option for developers. There's no reason why the people can't make our own solutions rather than be confined to abusive private US tech…

Adding taxes to things does not help anyone and goes against free choice. A better alternative would be to create the incentives so that companies like these can be born in Europe.

Companies like Microsoft should not be given "incentives to exist" anywhere (at least as they exist currently). They are corrosive to the public good.

Re: Moving from GitHub to Codeberg, for lazy people

#200

Post by tbayramov »

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…

(Shameless plug)

Hey, I’m building Monohub - as a GitHub alternative, and having private repositories is perhaps a key feature - it started as a place for me to host my own random stuff. Monohub [dot] dev is the URL. It’s quite early in development, so it’s quite rough around the edges. It has PR support though.

Hosted in EU, incorporated in EU.

Would be happy if you tried it out — maybe it’s something for you.

Edit: you can have a look at a public repository I have to see what it looks like now: https://monohub.dev/@tbayramov/efcore-audit-timestamps

Post reply on HN