Earlier quoted context omitted.
Services don't need to handle every single use case to be viable alternatives. GitHub does host proprietary software, but it is most well known for being a place to collaborate on free and open source software. Codeberg addresses this primary use case in a more focused way than GitHub intends to, and because of this, Codeberg is an excellent alternative to GitHub.
This sort of myopic, self-important, holier-than-thou perspective is why the open source community is so rarely successful in anything it tries to do for itself. Whatever you think Github's most known or most useful featureset is, the fact of the matter is it dominates because they don't draw philosophical lines in the sand and exclude people as a result. It's a big tent, all are welcome, and as a result, it has near…
If the goal is to share code, between just BSD Unix and Linux, open source would be incredibly successful. When you look at languages, development tools, databases and networking, a lot of FOSS has been very successful.
> Github's most known or most useful featureset is, the fact of the matter is it dominates because they don't draw philosophical lines in the sand and exclude people as a result.
The people who authored Codeberg have an agenda and are very direct about it. It is their property, and their right to do what they are doing... just as it is your right to vocalize you don't like it.
> I don't want to learn a different UI for contributing to FOSS than the one I use for my daily work.
Ok. Fair enough. I think I said roughly the same thing about git back when everything was CVS and Subversion.
> They need to understand that contributions and use are driven by utility and convenience and economics, not morality.
I make code all day. Some of the things I make have little monetary value to me or my company but might help others. It's not about morality, its just me doing what I want to do with my time and skills. I've made friends, built companies, and got way more out of FOSS than I've ever contributed to FOSS.
> Sacrificing anything utility-wise or convenience-wise for philosophy is just shooting themselves in the foot.
I think you are missing a very big point. Sharing with others isn't a "philosophy" it is an economic transaction... an exchange of value.