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

491–500 of 617 posts

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#491

Post by 48terry »

hedora wrote: post #392
treyd wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Codeberg is a service, not software. If we applied this standard then Codeberg would already have been in violation of the 4 Freedoms because they forbid distribution of CSAM (I would hope). Forgejo is unaffected by this because it's the software not the service and is not subject to the service's terms of service. You're misunderstanding the scope of this policy change.

I tried to address this when I pointed out no SaaS meets the bar in absolute terms, and the FSF also addressed it with the word "adequately". The policy change means that some free software projects are no longer welcome on codeberg, specifically because those projects take a stronger stance towards protecting free software than codeberg. What am I misunderstanding? Why should I trust them as stewards of forgejo?

I thought "don't like it, fork it" was the open source credo? You don't have to trust them as stewards. Fork and maintain it yourself then.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#492

Post by consumer451 »

hedora wrote: post #428
consumer451 wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not well informed on this Codeberg story, but could this simply be a way for them to avoid some of the destructive loads that GitHub has been experiencing since "vibe coding" became a thing? Maybe the code origin purity test is just a way to explain it? It appears to be just that: > The vote follows ongoing efforts by Codeberg to prevent automated software (bots) from taxing its infrastructure with excessive net…

(1) Cache the non logged-in pages. You can even host static pages in an unmetered way. They maintain their web service software. They should just do that. If an account is knocking over infra by scraping, ban the account. Make it slightly harder to sign up or something, if necessary. (2) Vibe coding agents like Claude Code, Codex, Copilot and the grok thing all prefer local copies of a project to scraping web service…

Yes, I am not trying to make any excuses for GitHub, however I recall one tweet that made my eyes bug-out:

> Yup, platform activity is surging. There were 1 billion commits in 2025. Now, it's 275 million per week, on pace for 14 billion this year if growth remains linear (spoiler: it won't.)

> GitHub Actions has grown from 500M minutes/week in 2023 to 1B minutes/week in 2025, and now 2.1B minutes so far this week.

This had to spill over into Codeberg as well, right?

https://x.com/kdaigle/status/2040164759836778878

https://xcancel.com/kdaigle/status/2040164759836778878

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#493

Post by amiga386 »

pessimizer wrote: post #358
squigz wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

RMS headed a political organization, and kept his political campaigning to things directly related to the politics that his organization represented. The people who were angry at RMS's "politics" were always actually mad at the concept of Free Software in general, and the fact that RMS thinks that software that is not Free is bad software (and does not think you are an exception.) He wasn't banging on about trans rig…

> Doesn't mean that he didn't have opinions

Strong agree. He has millions of opinions, all nicely catalogued on his personal website. He even has an RSS feed: https://stallman.org/rss/rss.xml if you're keen to know what he thinks about this or that US politics issue.

But he didn't abuse his control of the FSF to pursue his own politics, he kept the organisation strictly focused on software freedom. It's at risk of being completely irrelevant if tries to expand beyond its niche of software freedom.

The ethics of AI, code generation, and hosted software would be within the FSF's remit, though I think the policies of any specific code hosting site wouldn't be.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#494

Post by 48terry »

layer8 wrote: post #380
Zambyte wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just host your own git server, it's an afternoon project. Use other forges as mirrors.

I have been self-hosting Gitea since long before Forgejo existed, but I understood the parent to be talking about third-party hosting with a FOSS community around it.

No one's guaranteed to third-party hosting or communities. The software is there. Host it.

If no third-party or community wants to take you in, then I suppose you're going to have to start one for like-minded people. If there aren't any, then I suppose you've lost the marketplace of ideas.

Isn't that how this is supposed to work?

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#495

Post by queenkjuul »

hedora wrote: post #428
consumer451 wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not well informed on this Codeberg story, but could this simply be a way for them to avoid some of the destructive loads that GitHub has been experiencing since "vibe coding" became a thing? Maybe the code origin purity test is just a way to explain it? It appears to be just that: > The vote follows ongoing efforts by Codeberg to prevent automated software (bots) from taxing its infrastructure with excessive net…

(1) Cache the non logged-in pages. You can even host static pages in an unmetered way. They maintain their web service software. They should just do that. If an account is knocking over infra by scraping, ban the account. Make it slightly harder to sign up or something, if necessary. (2) Vibe coding agents like Claude Code, Codex, Copilot and the grok thing all prefer local copies of a project to scraping web service…

They said vibe coded projects are consuming excessive CI resources

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#496

Post by exiguus »

When I read the issues thread on Codeberg, it reaffirmed my decision to self-host my Git repositories and mirror them to GitHub, GitLab, and Codeberg. At the time, I chose this approach because Codeberg already had its "no private repos" rule in place. I know they don't ban all private repos, but still, I wonder: Did they have bad experiences with private repos, LLMs, or crypto projects? Or is this a preemptive measure?

However, Github and Others can also ban or delete my stuff anytime. But the feeling is a different. Because now I'm thinking what's next?

Tolerance is a beautiful thing, but it can also be painful. Perhaps, in general, it's better to make individual decisions rather than relying on sweeping statements.

Banning LLMs and crypto sounds more like a move made by a fearful, angry person and has little to do with openness.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#497

Post by 48terry »

Yokohiii wrote: post #46
boramalper wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The author seems annoyed that Codeberg wants to focus on projects that have a legitimate contributor community and is not designed for one-off individual projects. I think Codeberg was never intended for one-off individual projects in the first place, such as them discouraging private repositories. Quoting their Terms of Use [0]: > Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like s…

I didn't look into codeberg really and didn't follow any discussions around it, except some projects fleeing to codeberg. At the first glance it just looks like a github competitor. Recently I tried to create a repo there and nothing pointed out any of the noted restrictions or preferences. I think that is a clear communication problem. Maybe the times are chaotic for them and they need to figure out how to position…

> I didn't look into codeberg really

So, politely, why are you posting?

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#498

Post by 48terry »

zarzavat wrote: post #167
izacus wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit of a drama take - there's nothing "illegitimate" with your project, Codeberg just doesn't want it. And that's ok, noone owes you free hosting.

Codeberg market themselves as not just a host but a community, so mass banning projects that didn't do anything wrong and were previously operating within the rules feels more like rejection from a community rather than a business decision made of necessity, especially the way the decision came about via some quasi-democratic process.

The fun thing about communities is they can allow or disallow whoever they want, and if you don't like their decisions you can find a community more closely aligned with you.

Codeberg is a service.

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#499

Post by queenkjuul »

inigyou wrote: post #416
Hendrikto wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really is a shame Drew is so opinionated and dogmatic. I like most of his work, but his politics make Source Hut too shaky of a foundation to build on.

Amuses me that Codeberg and Sourcehut have the same naming scheme. What's next - SLoCbarn? Header Haven? Function City?

Repohaus

Re: I regret migrating to Codeberg

#500

Post by veeti »

y0ssar1an wrote: post #382
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.

> We'd all be using WinXP SE and IE6. the reason we have linux is because a bunch of geeks took a stand. i understand that you can't fight every battle, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't fight any battles. you're making a rationalization because taking a stand is usually inconvenient, and you don't want to be inconvenienced by anything.

Yet those same Linux geeks have now decided not to take a "stand" against AI, but rather embrace it. Twenty years ago when the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars raged on, did they oppose working with the military contractors at Red Hat or the NSA? No, they focused on the mission.
Post reply on HN