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

Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

blog.gitea.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 187 posts

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#161

Post by rapnie »

throwaccount12 wrote: post #117
rapnie wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is comparable to how Codeberg [0] is organized, which is also based on Gitea and one of the larger contributors upstream. Yet the number of members is tiny in comparison to their person base and growth. According to their latest numbers [1]: > We are hosting 42010 repositories, created and maintained by 34042 users. Compared to one month ago, this is an organic growth rate of +3372 repositories (+8.7% month-over…

You say "one of the larger contributors upstream" do you have a source for that? Because I took a look at the contributor list, and couldn't find any evidence of that.

Codeberg maintain their own long-standing fork of Gitea and have members that are also maintainer at the Gitea project. It is the persons doing upstream contributions, not a Codeberg account.

Their fork lives here: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/gitea

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#162

Post by roastedpeacock »

rapnie wrote: post #74
roastedpeacock wrote: post #52

What jurisdiction will the organisation be registered in and in the unlikely event of a dispute how will that impact the project?

It is apparently based in Hong Kong.

Given recent regressions in Hong Kong that may not be the best idea.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#163

Post by remram »

kdumont wrote: post #79
remram wrote: post #5

I've been donating to Gitea for years (on their Open Collective [1]) but if they start with this cryptocurrency/blockchain stuff, I am out. I am trying to fund development, not invest unstable currency technology. Gitea itself started as a fork of Gogs, it wouldn't be too surprising to see it fork again if they start being creative with the brand. [1]: https://opencollective.com/gitea

I've also been a contributor to Gitea, but it's not time yet to call the banners. I don't think this announcement was handled particularly well, but nonetheless, I think it's an important development for gitea to grow and become sustainable. Specifically, Gitea is in desperate need of full-time maintainers (and probably a part-time project manager), and I see this as an essential step to creating the necessary govern…

I have nothing against creating a company. It's probably a good development, unless that company does something really weird like shilling blockchain stuff. Having professional support is great and makes sense since both GitLab and GitHub have managed on-premise options too.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#164

Post by int_19h »

Aachen wrote: post #80
trevyn wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, they don't exactly make it low-friction to become a member: > Membership fees are debited by means of SEPA direct debit. Please email to contact@codeberg.org for other transfer methods.

That is literally the easiest inclusive way that works beyond a single country's borders. Easier for me would be iDeal, but that's not easier for you unless you're also Dutch. Easier for people in the USA might be credit cards, but those are issued only if you have a credit rating at all and the rating is good (I don't meet the former condition so bank said no), and surely transferring money from anywhere in the worl…

In US, if you have no credit score or a poor credit score, you can still get a credit card by making a collateral deposit with the bank (usually they expect it to be 2x your expected credit limit).

And transferring money to random bank accounts outside of the country is rather messy in US. Some banks won't even let you do it online.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#165

Post by Semaphor »

Aachen wrote: post #114
fragile_frogs wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only downside of SEPA is that it is a lot less common outside EU/Europe SEPA stands for "Single Euro Payments Area" and was build for the EU/Europe, I don't think it's available outside of Europe.

Can you not just enter an international bank account number (IBAN) into online banking outside of this area? How does transferring money work then, do you need to send couriers with cash or use third parties like paypal? IBAN is the most basic infrastructure I know of, and I've heard that in the past you also had bank routing so this paying via banks (and banks settling it later) can't be new. I should ask my boss ho…

> As of May 2020, 77 countries were using the IBAN numbering system

-- IBAN Wikipedia [0]

It’s not that widespread. For international payments, you can do international bank transfers which have fees associated with them which can be shared or put on one side of the transaction only. It’s often easier and cheaper to use a 3rd-party provider like XE or TransferWise.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Num...

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#166

Post by zimpenfish »

xorcist wrote: post #70
girvo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I constantly make that mistake. I don't know why, I simply can't seem to get the muscle memory right for some reason, and I always do ()[] first.

Brackets are a perfectly normal way to stylize references in every other context [1]. I don't know why Gruber made it backwards in Markdown but it was very clearly a mistake. -- [1] Like this.

To be fair, you can -kinda- do Markdown links like that with the [text][reference] style.

(Although I suppose not everyone supports that - it appears HN doesn't, for starters...)

[reference]: https://example.com/

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#167

Post by chrismorgan »

zimpenfish wrote: post #166
xorcist wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brackets are a perfectly normal way to stylize references in every other context [1]. I don't know why Gruber made it backwards in Markdown but it was very clearly a mistake. -- [1] Like this.

To be fair, you can -kinda- do Markdown links like that with the [text][reference] style. (Although I suppose not everyone supports that - it appears HN doesn't, for starters...) [reference]: https://example.com/

HN doesn’t use Markdown in any way, shape or form, so of course it doesn’t do anything special with it. But anything that does actual Markdown will handle it.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#168

Post by tucnak »

viraptor wrote: post #102
tucnak wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> It could be some poor girl from Iran That's not something a serious, registered company would risk given known sanctions against Iran. A random scam dao maybe doesn't care, but I suspect gitea does.

Serious, registered company wouldn't know— who is that on the receiving end of the bargain and therefore can't be held responsible for it; that's exactly the point why this technology is so beautiful and why it will ultimately prevail.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#170

Post by viraptor »

tucnak wrote: post #168
viraptor wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It could be some poor girl from Iran That's not something a serious, registered company would risk given known sanctions against Iran. A random scam dao maybe doesn't care, but I suspect gitea does.

Serious, registered company wouldn't know— who is that on the receiving end of the bargain and therefore can't be held responsible for it; that's exactly the point why this technology is so beautiful and why it will ultimately prevail.

That's not how law works, you can't just look the other way. If you distribute money to random people without restrictions, records, or knowing who they are, that's called money laundering. That's what crypto tumblers are.
Post reply on HN