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

Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

jorijn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 380 posts

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#321

Post by egorfine »

As obvious as it is that Microsoft is a predator never to be trusted, I believe that trusting a government-run web service is a choice even worse.

We know that Microsoft at least acknowledges that GitHub being down is something they are ashamed of and aims to fix. At the same time, I feel like having an EU government-run service down over a weekend because there is no one to fix it outside business hours is something that should be expected, not frowned upon.

It is actually down right now as I am writing this comment.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#322

Post by askonomm »

egorfine wrote: post #321

As obvious as it is that Microsoft is a predator never to be trusted, I believe that trusting a government-run web service is a choice even worse. We know that Microsoft at least acknowledges that GitHub being down is something they are ashamed of and aims to fix. At the same time, I feel like having an EU government-run service down over a weekend because there is no one to fix it outside business hours is something…

Depending on the government. USA government? Yes, I'd trust that even less than Microsoft. Most EU governments? I'd trust a hell of a lot more. Especially my own (Estonian).

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#323

Post by fasteo »

egorfine wrote: post #319

Related: GitLab's CEO post in Twitter[1] doesn't inspire confidence as well. A direct quote: "generational rebuild of git, the monolith giving way to composable, monetized services with agent-first APIs". Can you imagine /usr/bin/git rewritten into a set of composable, monetized services with agent-first APIs? [1] https://twitter.com/bstaples/status/2054227448204754963

You are missing some context. Full quote below.I believe it is just a fancy way to say that the are rebuilding their backend to make it more scalable

>>>5a/ Machine-scale infrastructure.

>>> Others are bolting AI onto platforms built for human-rate commits. Git itself wasn't designed for agent-rate work.

>>> We're rebuilding the underlying infrastructure for machine scale: a generational rebuild of git, the monolith giving way to composable, monetized services with agent-first APIs.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#324

Post by gchamonlive »

IanCal wrote: post #308
gchamonlive wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

Totally different thing, and if you don’t want to engage don’t, this is simply rude.

> this is simply rude

Look, you are the one that opened with "What on earth is the social component of GitHub?". What's the semantic function of that specific construction if not being completely ironic, like you decided I was wrong before engaging?

> if you don’t want to engage don’t

I am engaging, you just don't like that I'm not spelling it out. This is perfectly within the community guidelines.

> Totally different thing

It's just the same thing, you both are ignoring how important convenience is.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#325

Post by egorfine »

fasteo wrote: post #323
egorfine wrote: post #319

Related: GitLab's CEO post in Twitter[1] doesn't inspire confidence as well. A direct quote: "generational rebuild of git, the monolith giving way to composable, monetized services with agent-first APIs". Can you imagine /usr/bin/git rewritten into a set of composable, monetized services with agent-first APIs? [1] https://twitter.com/bstaples/status/2054227448204754963

You are missing some context. Full quote below.I believe it is just a fancy way to say that the are rebuilding their backend to make it more scalable >>>5a/ Machine-scale infrastructure. >>> Others are bolting AI onto platforms built for human-rate commits. Git itself wasn't designed for agent-rate work. >>> We're rebuilding the underlying infrastructure for machine scale: a generational rebuild of git, the monolith…

> Git itself wasn't designed for agent-rate work

/bin/ls wasn't designed for agent-rate work either.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#326

Post by egorfine »

askonomm wrote: post #322
egorfine wrote: post #321

As obvious as it is that Microsoft is a predator never to be trusted, I believe that trusting a government-run web service is a choice even worse. We know that Microsoft at least acknowledges that GitHub being down is something they are ashamed of and aims to fix. At the same time, I feel like having an EU government-run service down over a weekend because there is no one to fix it outside business hours is something…

Depending on the government. USA government? Yes, I'd trust that even less than Microsoft. Most EU governments? I'd trust a hell of a lot more. Especially my own (Estonian).

Trust is twofold.

Will EU government service steal my data? Absolutely not, here the trust is at the highest.

Will EU government screw up a commercial service? Absolutely yes. I fully trust EU governments to regulate itself to a full halt.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#328

Post by IanCal »

gchamonlive wrote: post #324
IanCal wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally different thing, and if you don’t want to engage don’t, this is simply rude.

> this is simply rude Look, you are the one that opened with "What on earth is the social component of GitHub?". What's the semantic function of that specific construction if not being completely ironic, like you decided I was wrong before engaging? > if you don’t want to engage don’t I am engaging, you just don't like that I'm not spelling it out. This is perfectly within the community guidelines. > Totally differen…

I'm not sure how to make it clearer. I do not understand what the "social" component of github is that people are using so heavily that it's a big thing to break from and requires huge centralisation, that it is the "most important aspect of the platform". I said that I assume I am missing something because I don't see much that really ties all these things together, and nothing like the network effects of, say, X or facebook.

All you've pointed to is devs working together and people filing bugs. All that requires is auth, no? Is that it? Is an SSO button really this enormous hurdle?

> It's just the same thing,

Saying dropbox is irrelevant because all end users could just "build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem." is not the same as saying "what is the social aspect of github?".

Closer is what I've argued elsewhere, which is that multiple different hosts running (something like) gitea selling cloud based storage as a service would be extremely close to github for end users. And it would be identical for what you've talked about wouldn't it?

> you both are ignoring how important convenience is.

The convenience of what, specifically? Not having to click an SSO button on a new website?

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#329

Post by gchamonlive »

IanCal wrote: post #328
gchamonlive wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is simply rude Look, you are the one that opened with "What on earth is the social component of GitHub?". What's the semantic function of that specific construction if not being completely ironic, like you decided I was wrong before engaging? > if you don’t want to engage don’t I am engaging, you just don't like that I'm not spelling it out. This is perfectly within the community guidelines. > Totally differen…

I'm not sure how to make it clearer. I do not understand what the "social" component of github is that people are using so heavily that it's a big thing to break from and requires huge centralisation, that it is the "most important aspect of the platform". I said that I assume I am missing something because I don't see much that really ties all these things together, and nothing like the network effects of, say, X or…

> All you've pointed to is devs working together and people filing bugs. All that requires is auth, no?

Collaboration is a form of socialization. GitHub made a social network on top of a SVN to create a forge that people can interact with each other creating issues, pull requests, reviewing and commenting on them, engaging in discussions, forking and improving upon each others works... These are not "just auth" and it's not something git solves by itself. I really don't know how to make this clearer either, sorry. Maybe it's this is the kind of thing that you see it and you get it or you don't, I don't know. For me and apparently for lots of people in this thread that makes sense.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#330

Post by lloydatkinson »

techknowlogick wrote: post #269
lloydatkinson wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I adopted Foregjo I did so because I didn't like the sound of some political arguments across threads about some alleged security issues Foregjo raised with Gitea who allegedly ignored them. What keeps you using Gitea? I'm wondering if I should try it over Foregejo now.

I'm one of the project leads of Gitea (and am paid for some of my work on Gitea), and here are some more details around the specific incident you are talking about: We were alerted to an issue, and investigated provided a patch, and then waited until the end of the embargo to release the next version with the fix. It turns out they had sent a follow up after our response to them that, due to their usage of an email r…

Thanks for the write up. This makes me consider Gitea again. That sounds like a frustrating and absurd situation.
Post reply on HN