241–250 of 380 posts
Another good contender is the Radicle[4][5] which is completely decentralized on top of the Git.
[1] https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/federation/src/branch/m...
[2] https://liberapay.com/forgejo
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True but GitLab is going to run into the same issues as GitHub, maybe even worse because GitLab doesn't have a trillion dollar multinational benefactor. Public corporation and developer tooling has never boded well, a current look at GitLab reflects this sentiment perfectly. Which is why we should always champion FOSS for dev tooling as it's the only way a community can have a say in an industry dominated by unregula…
> True but GitLab is going to run into the same issues as GitHub Will they? Has Gitlab doubled down on "Agentic AI" and thus require 30x capacity to support current users, while being kneecapped by Azure?
Same problem, capitalism, but different constraints.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Forgejo has both these things, I'd even argue Forgejo has a better runner than GitHub actions as it's less resource heavy and easier to debug when issues arise (only ran into one, and it was self inflicted).
I have no trouble believing it is better :), but it is not as easy to mirror a Github issues, or CI configuration, to Forgejo or back as it is to handle the git side. I think Radicle is interesting. It doesn't solve the CI bit, at least not yet, but I suppose it's possible to hook up some local runner for it. There's also a bug tracker which I believe was called bug , but I can't find it ;), that tries to bridge diff…
[1] https://radicle.network/nodes/seed.radicle.dev/rad:z3qg5TKmN...
I've also heard of Tangled [0] which is decentralized and built on the AT Protocol like Bluesky but also has some genuinely useful features that GitHub has been dragging its heels over in implementing, like PR stacking, such that entire companies have sprung up to add that feature in GitHub. Has anyone tried this? [0] https://tangled.org/
https://tangled.org/h14h.com/knot
Overall, I think the platform looks really promising. The AtProto separation between Personal Data Servers, Relays, and AppViews seems like the appropriate set of trade-offs, IMO.
Being able to host my git repos as a headless, data-only server is about as painless as self-hosting can get. Compared with ActivityPub solutions (like Forgejo), it's great that I get to side-step the tedium of hosting and scaling an entire webapp when all I really care about is controlling my data.
Since the initial setup, the only ops maintenance I've had to do is bump the knot-server version and redeploy (tangled.org displays a banner warning notifying me when it's outdated).
Excited to spend some more time with Tangled on other projects and test out their other features! I'm particularly interested in their native support for jj and stacked PRs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but GitHub is more than just git. The most important aspect of the platform that everybody seems to forget is the social component and how easy it made to create a persistent, off-site repository and collaborate across repos.
What on earth is the social component of GitHub? I assume I’m missing what’s useful to people here as it keeps getting brought up, but what is it? Is it the stars on a repo? Are people doing something else big with all of this?
[†] I occasionally have AI write one-off bullshit too, so I'm not casting stones. It's just overwhelmed the discovery signal with noise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's a shame that all these companies that benefited from open source have poisoned the industry like this Open Source and the OSI are an industry plant. Look at who sponsors it. The monopoly hyperscaler conglomerates get free labor and use it to build the world we despise: tracking panopticons, phones we can't install things on, device attestation, browser monoculture with no adblock, etc. etc. Google made people…
> Open Source and the OSI are an industry plant. Look at who sponsors it. This is ignorant to the history of Open Source software. Software has been open long before it was subsidized by large corporations. "Computer software was created in the early half of the 20th century.[2][3][4] In the 1950s and into the 1960s, almost all softwares were produced by academics and corporate researchers working in collaboration,[5…
Software then was also rather different from software now. It's not a government-funded research project these days.
> The CTO publicly apologised and said capacity needs to scale 30x to keep up with AI-driven load. I hope they don't start charging for regular use of GitHub, but when I see how some of the vibe coders make thousands of commits a day, I'm becoming more and more skeptical. Would be a real shame if we can't share and cooperate on code for free.
I feel like LLMs will help solve this problem they've created, TBH -- any human expert can tell in seconds when a repo has this problem, so it should be doable by a system that's tweaked over. The tricky part is writing a legal agreement that lets them apply vibe quotas! This is what Anthropic is already doing with CC, and tbh GitHub and GitLab are probably doing the same. The cost is some hate from devs on Twitter a…
People spend more than that on their (non-vibecoding) hobbies. Think of folks who do woodworking, 3D printing, sailing, car racing, etc. So $200/mo is not excessive if they get their enjoyment out of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there's no way the code is distributed properly according to any of the OSS licenses. In fact, it claims authorship with nonsense bylines saying the LLM wrote it.
> Because there's no way the code is distributed properly according to any of the OSS licenses. What are you talking about? There is no distribution, only read access.