GitHub Sponsors. It's a nice way to for free and open source developers to earn some money.
Which GitHub alternatives have anything like it?
Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
131–140 of 468 posts
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#132You might want to consider checking out GitLab and Gitee.
Gitee is Chinese. If you're in the US, it's considered a risk because it's Chinese. But people outside the US will not care.
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#133I migrated everything to codeberg several months ago (and created an annual donation schedule). I was never a big fan of github but what ultimately pushed me to ditch it was the way github was shoving copilot/chatgpt in my face without me ever asking. Codeberg has a clear stance on that and it's a stance I can totally get behind. In addition I spun up forgejo at a server at home for very critical stuff and it's aweso…
Note: If you use any form of AI-assisted coding tools, your project breaks Codeberg TOS
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#134It depends on what you are after?
1. Do you want something that works and feels like GitHub? -- Forgejo and Gitea are good for this.
2. Do you want a place to host git repositories with minimal hassle? -- GitLab, CodeBerg, and others are available.
3. Do you have your own hosting infrastructure? You could use gitolite and CGit/GitWeb on that hosting platform or local hardware.
4. Do you just want to host repositories? -- Gitolite can be used to help with SSH/auth/repository creation, and CGit or GitWeb for the frontend.
5. Do you need something like GitHub Actions? -- GitLab, Forgejo, and Gitea offer CI, or use external CI infrastructure.
6. Do you need issue tracking and management? -- GitLab, Forgejo, and Gitea provide these. There are alternatives from Jira to Kanban (including Trello) to Markdown (Obsidian and others) and more.
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
no; gitea and foregjo both support actions-style CI/CD and both serve mostly GH-compatible APIs and have GH-style apps. it's not 100% compatible (forgejo is a little more compatible than gitea [^1]), but many of your workflows might "just work" without even renaming the .github folder. ^1: in my recent experience, for my particular use cases
I'm one of the project leads of Gitea and we've put a ton of work into Gitea Actions, I'd be interested in any compatibility gaps that you've run into.
oh hello, thank you for your work on an excellent product! one small difference i ran into last weekend is that foregjo forwards the FORGEJO_TOKEN in the environment to composite actions so that they don't need to have a required "token" input.
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#136If only there was a convention for storing PRs and issues and wiki inside the repository itself, similar to how Fossil[1] does it. Then all the GitHubs and Gitlabs of this world would be limited to just providing UI and would be unable to hold our data hostage by design. [1] https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
I've used git-bug[1] for issues and it works pretty well. The web-ui is lagging behind and PR support would be everything you'd need to ditch a central-hosted web instance. [1] https://github.com/git-bug/git-bug
FWIW, I have a new and much better webui that I need to release. I'm also planning to work on PRs and other stuff around the end of the year.
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#137https://forgejo.org/
Is their CI and CD workflow robust like gitlab/github ?
Works well and is pretty straightforward.
Just set up a CI pipeline for PHP projects with a forgejo runner last week. Tried many approaches, ended up with a simple debian VM. Runner works well with docker images inside the VM, quite a flexible setup. Found this easier and better than my last tries a few years ago with gitlab, which always felt quite bloated.
I also published a blog post today about this whole journey: https://sarah-robin.com/blog/we-just-wanted-to-deploy-a-webs...
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
if you use ai to program at all you can't use codeberg.
You've made the same exaggerated claim in two comments. Not only are you not banned from Codeberg if you have used LLMs to help you write code "in any of your projects", but you're not even prohibited from using LLMs to help you develop projects that you host on Codeberg. What you can't do is "share projects that mostly consist of code written by 'generative AI'-tools". https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/commit/71149c…
I feel like you just directly contradicted yourself so there must be some nuance I am missing. Or is the key word "mostly"? Like I can use LLMs to help the work but still have to type most of the code myself?
I have not written more than maybe 10 lines of code in the last year so it seems I am prohibited from hosting on codeberg?
Or is the key word "share" and that's somehow different from "host"?
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#139Not sure if someone mentioned it already but I also used bitbucket in the past and found it very easy to use with a similar offering as github.
I really liked bitbucket, it's my favorite git management system I've used for real production work and it allows for self hosting. Self hosting is also way faster than gitlab from what I remember
Re: Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
#140To all of those proposing self-hosted GitLab: we did it for 6+ years in my company, and it's not always a smooth sailing. We had our own runners and we made it auto-upgrade across docker images daily before business start. It mostly worked really well, except those few times were a Docker upgrade had to be rolled back, or that one time the bundled pg_shared_buffers was set at 1MB by default, making schema upgrades im…
> That said, I wish we hadn't migrated to GH, our self-hosted instance had WAY less downtime despite being perhaps a bit slower (mgmt saving money) and required a bit more toil
The key thing that drove our decision to self host gitlab was that WE were the ones in control of when things happened. We didn't do upgrades during times where we really needed our git infra up, and we were in control of our response time to incidents. We were not at the mercy of some other company's upgrade schedule and incident resolution process.
Of course, it comes with added workload and responsibility, but as the above comment says, it was not that onerous. While we paid for Gitlab Enterprise for a long time, we eventually switched to the free tier as that company was winding down (for reasons unrelated to our choice of git hosting), and the free tier actually has pretty much everything we needed.