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

Codeberg Divides

lucumr.pocoo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 242 posts

Re: Codeberg Divides

#41

Post by singron »

Is there any evidence of division? Are all the vibe-coders going to some codeberg2? One of the main complaints is that the banned projects don't have human users proportionate to their activity, so if they all go to codeberg2, then that forge would just be full of projects nobody cares about.

Are there any projects on codeberg that are getting banned and actually have significant human interest?

If codeberg decided to kick out spammers, nobody would decry the loss, so what's being lost here? Is it strictly slippery slope?

Re: Codeberg Divides

#42

Post by Aurornis »

free_bip wrote: post #21

I think this move by Codeberg is lowkey genius. They're trying to build a community based on a set of shared values. Those who disagree with those values are now self-selecting out of the Codeberg community, which is exactly the point of passing these kinds of resolutions. The fact that the rule is open for interpretation means that they can effectively shut down malicious actors (i.e those who intentionally misrepre…

I’ve seen so many variations of this where a community starts adding more rules that are open to judgment.

Removing the obvious rule breakers looks like an easy win at first. Then over time the list of rules grows. Small groups become good at navigating the rule making process and getting changes pushed through. Before you know it, small groups of highly invested people are wielding the rules and the rule making process against their enemies or competitors. The community was long since cleared out from anyone who got sick of the drama, leaving a weird internal battle where different in groups are fighting with each other over little things and turning the rules against each other.

Maybe Codeberg will be different. Maybe the rule making stops here and it’s reasonably enforced against only the really bad examples, with leeway granted to others generously. Maybe it doesn’t turn into a slippery slope of little dramas that exhaust everyone who isn’t invested in the constant background drama of their code hosting site. I hope it does for their sake.

But I also think enough people like me have seen what happens to communities that go down the path of generating a lot of rules like these and will choose to steer clear of this site. It always feels like a good idea when you and all your friends are on the right side of the rules, but it’s less fun when you find yourself making choices or tip toeing around to avoid triggering the Nth round of rules that were introduced 10 steps past where you thought the rules were in a good and balanced place.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#43

Post by qweqwe14 »

pferde wrote: post #30
qweqwe14 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yes, that's exactly it. Now please go back to your githubs and leave us nerds who do not matter alone. We'll be fine, we promise!

1. Random dude self-hosts a Git instance

2. Gets mad that people he doesn't like DARE to sign up and use it

3. Announces that he won't allow people he doesn't like

4. Makes a big deal out of it like anyone cares

I dunno this is hilarious but pretty sad, the guy clearly has issues

Re: Codeberg Divides

#44

Post by cmrdporcupine »

singron wrote: post #41

Is there any evidence of division? Are all the vibe-coders going to some codeberg2? One of the main complaints is that the banned projects don't have human users proportionate to their activity, so if they all go to codeberg2, then that forge would just be full of projects nobody cares about. Are there any projects on codeberg that are getting banned and actually have significant human interest? If codeberg decided t…

Nobody has been banned yet, AFAIK. So nobody can answer your second paragraph question. But plenty are choosing to leave.

The judgement you're talking about here ("banned projects don't have human users propostionate...") is going to require evidence? At this point the software community is absolutely full of these tools and people who use them.

If the specific thing banned was projects like that, fine. But that's not what the clause added in the PR said.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#45

Post by yogthos »

A great way to ensure that most developers will not be using Codeberg going forward. While there's a ton of drama around LLM use right now, anybody who's actually used this tech in anger understands that these tools really do work, and that they will only be used more in the future. I guess Codeberg is angling to become a small artisanal community, and there might certainly be a niche for that.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#46

Post by aliasxneo »

free_bip wrote: post #27
aliasxneo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on this precedence, if I'm accepted into the community today, how would I know I'll be accepted tomorrow? If you're literally just using Codeberg as a mirror, then sure, it doesn't really matter much. But like you said, that's not what they are building. They want people to invest in the community. So now, as an investor of my hard-earned free time, I'm faced with the question on whether all my investment can g…

You are effectively saying you do not trust the judgement of the community to accept you long term. Why is that? Is it because you believe there would be a new policy that would exclude your workflow? What would such a policy be? Do you really, reasonably believe it would be implemented "tomorrow"? Do you think adapting to such a policy would be unreasonable? Or is it because you don't trust the judgement of the peop…

> You are effectively saying you do not trust the judgement of the community to accept you long term.

Correct. I was previously engaging with this community and had moved some repos over from GitHub. One of those repos deals with cryptography that has an intersection with "crypto" projects. Due to vagueness of the language ratified, it's unclear whether the repo now violates the ToS. This completely caught me off guard, and now my trust in the judgement of the Codeberg community has been weakened.

This feels like a reasonable reaction to me.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#47

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

I have no particular problem with this decision/policy on the part of Codeberg.

I do have an issue with their "tainted code" project that labels various FLOSS projects as "AI tainted".

ardour.org has the follow AI policy statement:

---------

Using LLMs to generate code for Ardour

A word about licensing, copyright and LLMs ("AI"). We require all code contributed to Ardour to be licensed under the GPL (you may retain copyright, but the code must use the GPL). Currently, following Thaler vs. Perlmutter in March 2025, no LLM-generated code may be copyrighted in the USA. The GPL relies on copyright, and cannot function if copyright is not held. Consequently, if you use an LLM (Claude, Codex, CoPilot etc. etc) to create code, it cannot be included in Ardour.

If you want to use LLMs to explore and understand some of Ardour's source code, feel free. But we cannot accept PRs or patches or contributions that are not licensed under the GPL, and if you choose to be honest about it, this means that no LLM-generated code can be accepted by us.

---------

Yet this codeberg-adjacent project considers this project to be AI-tainted. If you're going to do something, do it right or don't do it at all.

Re: Codeberg Divides

#49

Post by krupan »

free_bip wrote: post #21

I think this move by Codeberg is lowkey genius. They're trying to build a community based on a set of shared values. Those who disagree with those values are now self-selecting out of the Codeberg community, which is exactly the point of passing these kinds of resolutions. The fact that the rule is open for interpretation means that they can effectively shut down malicious actors (i.e those who intentionally misrepre…

I've been thinking along these lines more and more. Trying to specify exact limits and trying to account for every possible situation when making rules just encourages people to find holes and workarounds. It creates a game, a competition between the rule makers and everyone else.

When instead you state higher level values and ask for cooperation, it encourages us to work together. It's the Honor System instead of a deliberate competition between rule makers and everyone else.

Concrete example: sports

When you are playing with a group of friends and there's no referee, most everyone does their best to just play hard and follow the rules. It's not perfect, but it works for the most part because we all love the game and want to have a good time.

Once you introduce referees, the game within the game of "what can I get away with?" starts and you end up with players learning how to foul without getting caught and then players overreacting to fouls in order to make sure the rule breakers still get caught, and then it evolves into flopping to get a foul called even when there was none, and eventually people start to hate the sport altogether (see: NBA, FIFA)

Concrete example: government and police forces. Do I even need to elaborate on this one?

Re: Codeberg Divides

#50

Post by qweqwe14 »

gregdaniels421 wrote: post #31
qweqwe14 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That doesn't seem like a great take on this. You seem to be implying that only unemployed people choose not to use AI, and anything that doesn't use AI is a useless toy project. There were decades of software written before modern LLMs, and a lot of people choose to hand write their software as a form of maintaining their skill. Just like people practice martial arts even though we have guns. If you reflect on your w…

> Just like people practice martial arts even though we have guns.

The whole point of martial arts is the art itself.

The point of software isn't the process of creating software (it was never about that), it's the end result, and all people care about is that the end result is good. And if you don't like that, you can choose another industry.

Post reply on HN