Live data from Hacker News

GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

eldred.fr

21–30 of 140 posts

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#21
post #14
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me this is the GitHub moat.

It isn't really a moat so much as a loss leader. Travis CI was free back in the day IIRC.

Well if/when GH eliminates the free tier, I'll probably churn. I agree that's the main thing keeping me there.

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#23
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing about Codeberg that's FOSS only afaict. This was incorrect, I misread the changes to the TOS.

Codeberg requires that the repos you host are FOSS

https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1219 Not true anymore.

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#25
post #15
post #7

Does Codeberg provide free CI runners? I'd estimate Microsoft spends over $100m/year on free Github CI. Likely their biggest cost. It doesn't seem like a reasonable thing Codeberg to fund for free.

They do, but their capacity is limited so you have to ask them for access and make a reasonable case. https://docs.codeberg.org/ci/

Actually, that's only for the Woodpecker instance. Forgejo Actions can be used without asking for permission, and three tiers of (Linux-only, adm64-only) free runners are provided.

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#27

Are there any alternatives to Github that offer similar bang for the buck? Particularly for very small teams or solo devs that need private repos? The author here specifically mentions Codeberg, which seems like it's just for FOSS projects.

Note that private repos are supported on Codeberg. (I would link to one of mine, but you'd just see a 404 :P)

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#28

Are there any alternatives to Github that offer similar bang for the buck? Particularly for very small teams or solo devs that need private repos? The author here specifically mentions Codeberg, which seems like it's just for FOSS projects.

I like sourcehut. It's the only forge out there that isn't set out to copy the Github UI like everyone else. And its UI itself feels instantaneous, as if it was running locally.

I also like it, particularly for its outstanding CI, but I don't like the patch/email-centric approach. (Gave it a try, didn't have a good time.)

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#29
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... Training their own models out of your code...

If you're publishing your code anywhere, it's getting trained on. MS does not restrict themselves to only training on GH-hosted code.

The point still stands for private repos, and also not making the job easy for them.

Re: GitHub to Codeberg: my experience

#30
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Codeberg requires that the repos you host are FOSS

https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/pulls/1219 Not true anymore.

From the current Terms of Service:

  Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like storing secrets, team-internal discussions or hiding projects from the public until they're ready for usage and/or contribution.

  They are also allowed for really small & personal stuff like your journal, config files, ideas or notes, but explicitly not as a personal cloud or media storage.
So the ToS says only private repos that support FLOSS, but then backdoors into "small & personal stuff" which is pretty loose and up to Codeberg's discretion so probably not the best place for your private side project repos.
Post reply on HN