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

I regret migrating to Codeberg

xn--gckvb8fzb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 617 posts

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#311

Post by debugnik »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #217
debugnik wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I swear HN has some sort of Mandela effect about Codeberg's mission. Their website clearly states they're a community-led non-profit that hosts like-minded FOSS projects, and their FAQ directly asks you to host private repos somewhere else. Yet the amount of comments in this site proposing them as a GitHub alternative for individuals and companies, and suggesting them to move their repos there is absurd, and not enou…

Do yourself a favor and look at the actual HN thread [1] when Codeberg was widely discussed for the first time. It is crystal clear that Codeberg was seen as a direct alternative to GitHub at that time, and even the founder's quoted statement gave a nod to that I think? > [...] But as developers of free software we fell into a trap – we poured invaluable source code, documentation and last not least a huge and steady…

I just did, in fact I vaguely remembered it from back then, and after reading the announcement blog post and the quote, I still think that anyone who expected Codeberg to replace their private use of GitHub was fantasizing. They already stated their mission is to be a community-led forge for FOSS.

Maybe we could blame them for having lowered their ambitions around "lesser" FOSS, but then again the economics are changing.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#312

Post by skydhash »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #227
anticorporate wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "community" and "contributor community" are getting conflated here (and I made the same mistake in my original comment). All of the projects you cited certainly have a large user community. > To us, it seems ridiculous to see projects with a single developer and virtually no users consuming as much or even more resources than some of the largest community projects on Codeberg, which operate frugal with CI/CD…

Many influential F/OSS projects started with a small number of users (and contributors), and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Codeberg effectively says that it only welcome mature enough projects that it feels worthy to host, and that's selfish. That's not a direct problem by itself but still a good reason to get criticized.

> Many influential F/OSS projects started with a small number of users (and contributors), and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

They also start very small in terms of resources consumption.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#313

Post by cmrdporcupine »

Aachen wrote: post #16

I'm a member of Codeberg and was allowed to vote on these amendments. There was the annual assembly meeting before the ballots were sent by email. Each proposal had a short presentation and a few minutes of Q&A. It wasn't a discussion (the text was final at this point), it was just to ask for clarifications. In the meeting I asked about the server load that they mentioned in their presentation, but misphrased it and…

I had a project on there. The vote result was clearly already a foregone conclusion the moment it was announced. Any voices that even asked for clarification were shouted down on multiple forums. I had never joined as a formal community member to get involved in voting on there, but saw no point in doing so prior to the vote. The tone on external forums (Mastodon, etc.) was just brutal, and the discussion on the PR confined and curtailed.

I've already been downvoted to oblivion and insulted galore on yesterday's thread for commenting on this so I don't have much energy for it today but I'll say this:

Nobody can reasonably fault a community if they want to define their own limits and terms to engagement with their resources. They can legitimately be angry and frustrated if you do so retroactively and without clarity. I put a lot of work into moving onto Codeberg in the first place -- because I (thought I) shared their values. There was not a single note or concern about agentic tool use then, nor in the 10 months I was on there.

Further the actual blog post that finally described the terms and how they will do enforcement came after the vote on the rather narrow clause in the PR. So, again, no, this is not a healthy democratic process.

And then I had to put a lot of work into moving off.

That's my time and energy and the energy of my contributors wasted and it's just strikes me as poor behaviour driven by a crowd with pitchforks that wants to wave them and had a priori defined an in and out group.

... But at least I had an LLM minion to help me with the moving off part.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#314

Post by nekusar »

Yep, cause all of the LLM hatred is a proxy for end-stage capitalism and a technofeudalist overlay across sympathetic governments.

And yeah, fighting against the worst that capitalism has to offer is a laudable fight. But LLMs, especially Chinese open weights ones offer powerful tools we can use in our fight, as aligned interests of socialists, communists, and anarchists.

Codeberg people who were permitted to vote (700 out of 70000 repo maintainers) instead decided to fight the proxy (llm) and not the actual horrible (capitalists). And of course, that battle is neatly impossible to even define externally. Its a game of purity whack-a-mole with Codeberg admins playing the SCOTUS obscenity game of "I'll know it when I see it".

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#315

Post by veeti »

squigz wrote: post #295
throwayay4929 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imaging where the world would be if Firefox, when it came out, went deep on the Iraq war? Or if RMS got involved in, I don't know, the Lewinsky affair in the 1990s, and made it a core part of the FSF? We'd all be using WinXP SE and IE6. "The personal is political" is a truly toxic idea that's been corroding nice things since it's inception.

Using RMS as an example of "how to not be political" is uh... interesting.

When even RMS seems like a more level headed political actor, you know you've gone off the deep end.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#316

Post by hibikir »

adamddev1 wrote: post #189
eviks wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people using LLMs are using up disproportionately huge hosting resources So block huge resource use? What if people use LLMs with disproportionately tiny resource use?

Making a principled ban against LLM would seem to allow for more freedom and flexibility with usage limits. People who are creating more by hand would still be allowed to have more breathing room. With a hard limit of resources everyone would be more restricted. That's also a solution, but it's just a totally different approach. The LLM ban could help to allow for freedom without the resources getting overwhelmed.

Only if you can reasonably separate LLM from non LLM code, which is in no way a solved problem. Even if one agrees with their priorities 100%, it's just asking for non-automated enforcement. It's difficult to execute, and either lead to completely arbitrary enforcement, or a lot of resources being spent in exchange for this freedom you mention. It's just a very hard practical line to try to draw.

And let's be real, most of the costs LLMs incur on hosting providers have little to so ln who makes commits. A popular project than bans LLMs from contributing, but is used often by LLMs that are using the project as a library is indistinguishable from one that allows LLM contributors.

So from a practical perspective, it's a head scratcher

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#317

Post by zelphirkalt »

chmod775 wrote: post #250

Keeping up with this stuff is for people who define their identity through virtue signalling and whatever personality trait they have decided to make the problem of everyone around them. Let them have their little corner of the internet and just stay away. There's plenty of alternatives run by people who don't feel the need to bring their personal baggage into a cooperative environment.

Are you consciously choosing to completely ignore large parts of Codeberg's explanations, regarding the amount of traffic they get from one-man LLM shows, and additionally completely fail to consider the type of organization, that Codeberg is, in order to label this as merely virtue signaling?

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#318

Post by JD557 »

debugnik wrote: post #311
lifthrasiir wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do yourself a favor and look at the actual HN thread [1] when Codeberg was widely discussed for the first time. It is crystal clear that Codeberg was seen as a direct alternative to GitHub at that time, and even the founder's quoted statement gave a nod to that I think? > [...] But as developers of free software we fell into a trap – we poured invaluable source code, documentation and last not least a huge and steady…

I just did, in fact I vaguely remembered it from back then, and after reading the announcement blog post and the quote, I still think that anyone who expected Codeberg to replace their private use of GitHub was fantasizing. They already stated their mission is to be a community-led forge for FOSS . Maybe we could blame them for having lowered their ambitions around "lesser" FOSS, but then again the economics are chan…

Even looking at the comments from that thread and the Codeberg page at that time in archive.org, I don't really see much that points to it as a proper GitHub alternative, other than the editorialized (I think) post title.

Which I think might be the cause of confusion here. I suspect that there was never an official statement (or intention) of Codeberg being a full GitHub replacement, but since a lot of people recommended it as an alternative to GitHub, it started to be seen that way.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, though, as I'm quite confused about the outrage about Codeberg's decision. At least in my mind, Codeberg was already a highly opinionated forge (with the private repo ban and all), so this was not much of a surprise.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#319

Post by HelloNurse »

raffael_de wrote: post #243
AussieWog93 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> many ‘vibe coders’ are annoying, negative net value assholes Where on Earth does this sentiment come from? I've had people make AI contributions to my open-source projects and while they may be perhaps less technical on average they're every bit as well intentioned - possibly moreso since they're interested in improving the project rather than establishing a little fiefdom.

> AI contributions using AI is not vibe coding. the difference is whether a developer takes responsibility and the according measures before releasing/contributing or not.

I agree with the distinction between using a LLM as a tool to make personal contributions to healthy projects and expecting Codeberg to host arbitrary slop, but I'm afraid you are assuming good faith.

The "developer" could be a bot, or a tool-assisted criminal or activist, and they might be using LLMs to enhance their ability to add stealthy malware, plant patent or copyright violations, impose not quite shared technical choices, and so on.

Many open source projects ban AI contributions just because they are an efficiently low effort way to waste the time of the actual maintainers.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#320

Post by thejosh »

qweqwe14 wrote: post #275
thejosh wrote: post #244

I would love to use something that isn't GitHub for code hosting. Codeberg sounds great, but from using it day-to-day, it's really slow sometimes, and frequently times out (from Perth, AU, if it matters). This is not just the SSH protocol for git pushes, but also for browsing. (I do have a self-hosted forgejo (came from gitea), it's great, Postgres database backs up, files are easy to backup, it's also git so I can j…

You can just self-host GitLab CE and use self-hosted ElasticSearch integration to set up code search. I really don't understand the point of Forgejo, sounds like making your life harder

For the forgejo side of things, this is for my own projects. Not hosting others (or for their code search, this was for mine).

For context, forgejo does have [code search](https://forgejo.org/docs/latest/user/search/code-search/), which is simple to enough.

I like forgejo/gitea - a single app.ini, postgres for the database. Done through a docker compose.

Last time I ran gitlab, it required oodles of memory - it's just me!

> You can just self-host GitLab CE and use self-hosted ElasticSearch integration to set up code search. I really don't understand the point of Forgejo, sounds like making your life harder

Sounds like more steps/maintenance/hassle and a more complicated than just using forgejo for my own personal projects, forgejo uses <120MB of memory for me, has runners, etc.

Post reply on HN