Live data from Hacker News

Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

howtogeek.com

31–40 of 289 posts

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#31
post #15

Sentiment for/against GitHub aside... "Why X are doing Y" articles like these pretend that the premise of "X are doing Y" is true, conveniently skipping to the "Why" before proving that the premise is even accurate in any meaningful way. This is why I never buy headlines that start out with "Why". > developers are ditching Proceeds to list but a handful of remotely meaningful repos against the hundreds of thousands o…

[dead]

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#33
For private code, it just feels safer to self host that -- ideally behind wireguard for an extra layer of security.

For public code hosting, GitHub have banned too many people/projects for comfort. From security researchers to 18+ game devs, too many have been wrongfully banned.

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#34

Why don't open source alternatives just copy the UI to make it easier to switch? Everyone knows the GitHub UI and it's intuitive. I'm happy to get more privacy and freedom, you don't have to make a worse design just to be different. Fluxer figured this out and they're the best discord replacement imo. https://fluxer.app/

Inst gitea doing this?

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#36

It's been 9 months since I ditched Github. Currently I self-host Gitea [0], use its registry for Docker, NPM etc and act runners [1] for github actions alternative, everything secured under tailnet. I'm extremely satisfied with that setup. It is batteries included & fire and forget. Now I use Github only as backup by mirroring my self hosted repos. [0] https://gitea.com [1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/act-ru…

You use github as a backup, why bother self-hosting then?

The self hosting will still be there and working as expected no matter what GH does (fails... again, DMCAs the repo, bans the account, etc.). Self hosting isn't only about being the only one with the data, it's also for the independence aspect. GH as a backup doesn't hinder the independence. Network effects are strong and make a lot of developers still have a GH presence as a secondary platform.

The evolution is when one can finally fully disconnect from GH, the main self hosted platform will continue to operate as if nothing happened.

A migration can have a period of parallel running.

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#37

It's been 9 months since I ditched Github. Currently I self-host Gitea [0], use its registry for Docker, NPM etc and act runners [1] for github actions alternative, everything secured under tailnet. I'm extremely satisfied with that setup. It is batteries included & fire and forget. Now I use Github only as backup by mirroring my self hosted repos. [0] https://gitea.com [1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/act-ru…

You use github as a backup, why bother self-hosting then?

Github is an extra layer of backup, among normal backups.

[edit]

Notable reasons:

- Github runners went oftenly out of space & they were slow. With self hosted runners I don't have these issues anymore because I control the hardware.

Previously I was paying Docker Build Cloud/Depot for performance + Github Pro for extra minutes. Now it's zero cost, superb performance and unlimited minutes.

- I have a centralized registry with private packages and images.

- It's secure, I don't worry if I accidentally make a repo public or leak secrets. I control the access to it in network level.

- I own everything, in case something goes nuts (eg lose access to GH) I'm safe.

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#38
post #15

Sentiment for/against GitHub aside... "Why X are doing Y" articles like these pretend that the premise of "X are doing Y" is true, conveniently skipping to the "Why" before proving that the premise is even accurate in any meaningful way. This is why I never buy headlines that start out with "Why". > developers are ditching Proceeds to list but a handful of remotely meaningful repos against the hundreds of thousands o…

You can just insert the word "some" as required.

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#39

It's been 9 months since I ditched Github. Currently I self-host Gitea [0], use its registry for Docker, NPM etc and act runners [1] for github actions alternative, everything secured under tailnet. I'm extremely satisfied with that setup. It is batteries included & fire and forget. Now I use Github only as backup by mirroring my self hosted repos. [0] https://gitea.com [1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/act-ru…

You use github as a backup, why bother self-hosting then?

Not GP. Probably less dependencies on github, e.g. actions which sometimes don't work. This way github is a "dumb backup".

I selfhost forgejo (gitea fork) on home sever (nuc), similar setup with tailscale. I was planning to setup git mirror on a remote VM for backup, but since I am the only one using it and have everything on dev laptop and remote backups of nuc server I didn't bother to do that (I know I still should).

Re: Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives

#40
post #20

So sad to see that no articles about this even mention Mercurial. This is a golden opportunity for Hg providers to shine.

this not a `git` failure per se...

Yes, but the thing is just that if people are looking around for new providers it's an opportunity for alternative systems to attract attention and users.
Post reply on HN