Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but GitHub is more than just git. The most important aspect of the platform that everybody seems to forget is the social component and how easy it made to create a persistent, off-site repository and collaborate across repos.
What on earth is the social component of GitHub? I assume I’m missing what’s useful to people here as it keeps getting brought up, but what is it? Is it the stars on a repo? Are people doing something else big with all of this?
Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
211–220 of 380 posts
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#212“It’s not because of outages” - goes on to complain about outages. The outages might be due to AI load, but that’s to relevant because your leaving isn’t due to outages. Even though the article is primarily about outages. If you have a problem with your code being scanned for AI training, then write that article. But this article is about outages.
it's about GitHub's issues in general, including outages. every section gets somewhat equal amount of attention
The section named “Why outages aren't actually the reason” never tells me why outages aren’t the reason. It just continues taking about outages.
I’ll admit I got tired of reading about outages and didn’t absorb the remainder of the article well.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#213People constantly cry out for decentralization. In reality, however, most systems eventually end up centralized. Perhaps when people ask for decentralization, they are actually seeking a new center where they can become the new pioneers. It seems that when they feel they have no chance of winning under the existing rules, they use decentralization as a pretext to overturn the board.
People do want the advantages of decentralization, but they don't want to pay the price for it. Even worse, centralized systems are great for most of the time, the pain generally happens only in a short span, but then very intensely (imagine a merger and a sudden price spike). Decentralization is a little bit of pain all the time, for a lot of happiness only in the rare case where the centralized alternative collapses.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#214I have been using my self hosted forgejo in May, and liking it just fine, I recommend it for anybody who is curious. I don't really trust GitHub to keep things private anymore. The hardest parts of switching to forgejo: 1) coming up with a comfortable way to pronounce "forgejo" in my head, and 2) adapting to not having the same GitHub v3 API and needing to switch to a different CLI for PR creation, repo creation, etc…
They make it rather easy by providing an audio pronunciation: https://forgejo.org/static/forgejo.mp4 With my American accent, I don't quite say it exactly like the recording, but pretty close: "for-JAY-oh"
This is probably a personal problem, honestly. The spelling is hardwired to short-circuit away from that pronunciation in my head, meaning every time I have to type it out I have a pretty big mental split.
It would actually be easier for me if it was in Cyrrilic or Greek letters, Форджеьо or Форджеджо or Φορτζέγιο don't have the blockers on pronunciation that Forgejo does.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#215Microsoft is losing the war here. It'll take a long time before GitHub will tumble, but the cracks are now noticeable for everyone. AI is killing AI-Hub I mean GitHub.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason will be that not everyone wants to deal wit maintaining a self-hosted box.
my eyes have been glazing over it feels like our infra/devops dudes have proverbially given up and they're just looking to buy cloud services to do everything now. security guy looks like he wants to jump off a bridge and i keep trying to nudge them into waking up to not needing 99.9% uptime we'll settle with 95% uptime and no one needs to be on call, and you can go to sleep at night knowing all the code lives behind…
It's about offloading blame. If a server nukes, it's on infra to get a guy to unscrew it. If a service nukes, infra guy says "welp it's down", keeps on clicking.
It doesn't matter what happens 6m-2y down the road, your odds of being laid off or job hopping are high in the current regime so this all makes sense. You pay some amount of your budget to make your life "easier" in the now.
The trouble comes 2-5y down the line when the service is bought out by , and you have to scramble to replace it or hold your nose and pay up.
(tbh, migration is not that hard, but the org will act like it is)
The matrix of authentications, compliances, and intranets will only go up as your company grows and often are enforced by people who do not suffer them daily.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's software, which can be infinitely and freely copied, people are going to copy it, and they should, because not everyone should write their own service from scratch (on top of an scm they wrote from scratch (on top of a language and operating system they wrote from scratch too)).
I never suggested building everything from scratch. However, Forgejo is ultimately just a new dependency. Does abandoning GitHub Actions for Forgejo Actions eliminate lock-in? No, it’s merely a shift in dependency. If the Forgejo core team announces tomorrow that their 'philosophy has changed' and overhauls the architecture, tens of thousands of 'independent' home servers will grumble, but they'll inevitably run git…
> If the Forgejo core team announces tomorrow that their 'philosophy has changed' and overhauls the architecture, tens of thousands of 'independent' home servers will grumble, but they'll inevitably run git pull to update anyway.
This is a hilarious - and empirically wrong - thing to say considering Forgejo's raison d'être[1] and lineage.
If users just grumbled and ran git pull anyway, Forgejo would not exist, and neither would its fork-parent project (Gitea); everyone would be using Gogs under duress. Forgejo's past shows that people care about the philosophy, which is why this particular fork of a fork is thriving.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I'm not forgetting the spirit of what Git is, I'm also remembering how GitHub used "all open repositories" to train their first Copilot without telling anyone. So, no thanks. I'll not be committing any personal code there anymore. And no, I don't care for the social aspects either. Discoverability, stars, and AI bot powered issue bombardment. I'm fine like this. Also, remember, "Open Source is not about You".
It did so in direct violation of the licenses of the code held there as well and then sold code snippets they had no rights to and still do.
How did you draw those conclusions? They don't seem to be in line with court rulings (i.e. Anthropic), which hold that training is fair use. Code is being treated the same as any other copyrighted content that is used for training, from blog posts to PR announcements from companies and everything in between. Of course the blog posts are PR announcements have their copyright held by their authors, with no license provided at all, so if OSS code being used in training is a violation, then so would everything being trained on (to a first approximation...public domain works excepted). But no court has every taken that position to my knowledge.
There's just so much confusion around this. In this thread alone:
* Distillation is legal under copyright; the violations would come as ToS violations, which is contract law, not copyright law.
* Training is legal as well, so long as the original material was obtained legally.
* Moving code off of GitHub doesn't change any of this: AI companies are free to download your git repo no matter where it is hosted, just like they can any other content on a publicly accessible website.
* Liability comes into the picture when the models are used to infringe copyright in their output. We'll have to see the outcome of the NYT case here, but that is proceeding at a glacial pace.
I am not a lawyer; I'm an interested amateur that's been following the saga for years. I wish the discussion here on HN were more nuanced.
If anyone has legal updates that render any of the above incorrect, I'd love a pointer to the decisions. One area I'm particularly weak is the legal status in countries that are not the US: I don't follow those laws nearly as carefully, nor the court cases brought.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly did they train? Copilot is powered by claude, gemini, or ChatGPT these days. Did they train autocomplete? I mean the code is open source so anyone can scrape it and train it too. I'm kind of glad they did train it because otherwise we'd still be stuck with Apple level AI models right now. The whole reason we have so many models, including open weight models, that are all competitive with each other is be…
Yeah have to agree here, Github Copilot itself doesn't have any first party models they use the frontiers. So, they didn't "train" using public repos but they probably allowed (or didn't prevent) the frontiers from pulling the repos along with the rest of the internet when creating their models.
Is y'alls collective memory so short? Copilot just a few years ago was auto complete on steroids that was entirely first party and trained by GH on users' code.
Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo
#220I’ve moved to self hosted gitea a year ago running in my homelab and not publicly accessible. No https, registrations disabled and repos are not public. I’m thinking about making public instance and use it with https, but minimize the attack surface, any recommendations especially about gitea/forgejo?
When I adopted Foregjo I did so because I didn't like the sound of some political arguments across threads about some alleged security issues Foregjo raised with Gitea who allegedly ignored them. What keeps you using Gitea? I'm wondering if I should try it over Foregejo now.
As someone who uses gitea, honestly it’s because I set it up a while ago and foregjo hasn’t offered anything compelling to force a switch, nor has gitea “enshittified” like the concerns around the fork raised.
Honestly, stay where you are