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

FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

code.ffmpeg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 374 posts

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#291

Post by nosioptar »

nine_k wrote: post #152
picafrost wrote: post #119

It's cool to see such an impactful project choose sovereignty. I hope more projects follow their example. If you're a backbone-of-the-internet project like FFmpeg is, living on GitHub seems horrible. You will be subjected to thousands of low quality pull requests and issues from people searching for typos to fix, adding a line of white space for a contrived reason, or similar nonsense changes. Just so they can put "F…

Typos may be quite impactful, don't discount them. My only contribution to node-grpc fixed missing quotes, but only because that produced real crashes.

A typo caused NASA'a Mariner I to fail.

https://science.nasa.gov/mission/mariner-1/

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#292

Post by nozzlegear »

bakugo wrote: post #158
nozzlegear wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the anubis mascot an anime girl?

Go take a look at the author's websites/socials and it should become pretty obvious why.

I looked at their Bluesky profile and they mostly post about their GitHub projects.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#293

Post by quectophoton »

trialect wrote: post #259

Forgejo is great and all... up until you're trying to use your SSO with a user named 'admin': https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8030 then it just looks like a bad joke with all the anime girls and everything else...

There are also some minor issues with composite actions and reusable workflows.

If I use composite actions, the logs get associated with the wrong step[1]. It's just a visual thing (the steps themselves run fine), but having 90% of your action logs in the "Complete job" step is unpleasant.

For reusable workflows there's a few open issues as well, but what happens in my case is that jobs just don't start at all, they stay as "Waiting" forever.

These issues only matter if you write your own reusable actions with YAML (the actions written in JavaScript seem to work fine), but it's worth mentioning.

Other than these two issues, I'm very happy with Forgejo and would still recommend it if people ask for my opinion.

[1]: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/5049

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#294

Post by kurante »

trialect wrote: post #259

Forgejo is great and all... up until you're trying to use your SSO with a user named 'admin': https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8030 then it just looks like a bad joke with all the anime girls and everything else...

This is a bad faith comment in so many layers:

- The provided reason given was due to user accessibility concerns complicated by what likely is a breaking change.

- Even if you don't agree with the claim, a reserved name isn't unreasonable at all. Not to make a standard of GitHub, but the `admin` username is reserved there too.

- Dismissing an entire product based on a single non-critical technical limitation while simultaneously not contributing to the solution (unless you have a different username there, happy to be corrected) is fundamentally toxic.

- All the while conflating two separate products (Anubis and Forgejo) that aren't related at all.

- And that Anubis offers a non-anime girl solution, and is MIT Licensed if you really don't care for supporting the author.

I'm not going to prod at the "and everything else" part either.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#295

Post by mhitza »

esperent wrote: post #37

Opening this site I get "Oh Noes! Invalid Response" with an anime girl. Tried refreshing, opening in a private windows, same thing. EDIT: tried it again and got to "Making sure you're not a bot" with the same cringey anime girl, then the site loaded without CSS. Tried one more time, finally it loaded. EDIT 2: clicked on a link and I'm back to "Oh Noes!..." .

I'm also locked out with the same message. Might be a setup failure as I didn't encounter this issue on other websites using that PoW page.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#296

Post by pm215 »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #257
pmontra wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FFmpeg seems to have dealt with that problem when they still were on github. This is the paragraph at the end of the readme: > Contributing > Patches should be submitted to the ffmpeg-devel mailing list using git format-patch or git send-email. Github pull requests should be avoided because they are not part of our review process and will be ignored. An agentic LLM bot is likely to have no problems at creating a patc…

Why is it a major pain? Isn't it part of git workflow? Or is this because most developers got complacent in only using GitHub and similar?

(I work on a project that uses an email workflow. "Should we switch to something else?" is a perennial topic.)

I think the main pain points are:

* unfamiliarity -- if you're not already set up then it's extra admin work. And the "obvious" approach (paste the patch into your usual email client and hit send) generally mangles the patch.

* developers are no longer largely using local plain text based email clients -- if you are already doing email that way then sending patches like that is a natural extension. If your email client is gmail, or worse still some Microsoft mail server, now you have to figure out how to send email in a way that's not html and doesn't get mangled by your mail server.

* how to set it up is not a single well documented path. Github has an incentive to do a decent tutorial/docs, and how to create an account and send a patch is the same for everyone. Using git send-email, there's a lot more variability: how to install it depends on your OS, and how to configure it to talk to your mail server depends on your mail server. In these days of two factor authentication and app specific passwords, it's no longer as easy as "put the server name and your account name and password into the config file".

This has got better in that now you can point people at e.g. https://git-send-email.io/ which has info on e.g. setting up gmail app specific passwords and what kind of authentication to use.

If you're a regular developer on a project, this is a one-time pain and thereafter sending patches is straightforward (assuming you're not totally allergic to the command line). But for one-off or first time contributions it can be a barrier.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#297

Post by Aurornis »

reconvene1290 wrote: post #238
Aurornis wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rejecting useless or white space-only PRs is quick and easy. It’s not as big of a problem as you’re suggesting. I’ve gone through a few projects and updated the documentation as I explored the codebase. Reception ranges from thankful to people scorning me for attempting to make contributions that weren’t code changes. It’s frustrating when maintainers are more interested in keeping people out than in considering actu…

It’s all in the approach: start with a “thank you for the project”, and a “hope you don’t mind but I’ve corrected a few typos” and nobody will shout you down. Only go with a blank PR description and it’ll come across as arrogant and spammy.

> and nobody will shout you down.

Unfortunately not my experience everywhere.

> Only go with a blank PR description and it’ll come across as arrogant and spammy.

Not at all what I was doing when I triggered the open source maintainers I was talking about.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#298

Post by Aurornis »

pmontra wrote: post #236
picafrost wrote: post #119

It's cool to see such an impactful project choose sovereignty. I hope more projects follow their example. If you're a backbone-of-the-internet project like FFmpeg is, living on GitHub seems horrible. You will be subjected to thousands of low quality pull requests and issues from people searching for typos to fix, adding a line of white space for a contrived reason, or similar nonsense changes. Just so they can put "F…

FFmpeg seems to have dealt with that problem when they still were on github. This is the paragraph at the end of the readme: > Contributing > Patches should be submitted to the ffmpeg-devel mailing list using git format-patch or git send-email. Github pull requests should be avoided because they are not part of our review process and will be ignored. An agentic LLM bot is likely to have no problems at creating a patc…

The paragraph at the end of the README was letting people know that the GitHub PRs are unmonitored, not suggesting it was a problem.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#300

Post by debugnik »

Krssst wrote: post #149
strogonoff wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ingenious approach for a sustainable OSS project: serve the free version with playful art that you enjoy and that expresses your individuality, but which some people are bound to find triggering/improper; sell a bland lifeless corporate edition to those people.

> some others would find triggering/improper I guess the main point is branding clash if you're a large company website (most companies care a lot about how their brand is shown, if they care about spacing/padding around their logo they also care about what pictures are shown when joining), hopefully nobody is triggered by this kind of art. (though resentment could build up if actual humans get frequently unexpectedl…

> hopefully nobody is triggered by this kind of art

Apparently a good chunk of HN is. Anubis-tan seems to me the main reason that this comment section about FFmpeg and Forgejo has devolved into a debate about Anubis; more than the intersitial page itself.

Post reply on HN