331–340 of 385 posts
The truth is that I publish OSS projects on GitHub because that's where the community is, and the issues/pull requests/discussions are a bonus. If I just want to host my code, I can self host or use an SSH/SFTP server as a git remote, and that's usually what I do.
I don't dislike Codeberg inherently, but it's not a "true" GitHub replacement. It can handle a good chunk of GitHub repositories (namely those for well established FOSS projects looking to have everything a proper capital P project has), but if you're just looking for a generic place to put your code projects that aren't necessarily intended for public release and support (ie. random automation scripts, scraps of con…
I love Gitea and self-hosting it has been effortless, even through upgrades.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The key is hermetically/reproducibly Why not use VMs? Libvirt is scriptable enough for that. And LXC/Incus can be used if you want the shorter starting time.
Ok, that solves like 20% of the problem. How (and where) are you provisioning these VMs? How are you managing what versions of what are installed on them, and is that process reproducible? None of this is hard, exactly, but you do have to put in the legwork of doing it, and it's mostly only the big players who've done so.
Creating a build machine is not rocket science.
How has reliability been so far compared to GitHub, especially on bigger repos?
I've been using a self-hosted forgejo (which Codeberg uses and maintains) instance for all of my non-work projects and it's been great. I don't miss GitHub at all. I also keep it accessible only from Tailscale so that AI crawlers and such can speedily make their way into the sun.
I went with gitea, but for the same general reasons. I like It has the option to mirror repos up to GitHub for the stuff I actually want to share with the world. Is there anything that made you choose forgejo specifically? I’m not eager to move platforms, but I know there’s more options that have popped up in the years since I first stood up my gitea instance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP didn't conflate them. They said they want to be able to rely on their git remote. The people responding are saying "nah, an unreliable remote is fine because you can use other remotes" which doesn't address their problem. If Codeberg is unreliable, then why use it at all? Especially for CI, issues, and collab?
The person you’re replying to is saying that you can do everything outside of tracking issues, running CI, ... without a remote. Like all Git operations that are not about collaboration. (but there is always email) Maybe a hard blocker if you are pair programming or collaborating every minute. Not really if you just have one hour to program solo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I mean, git's whole raison d'etre, back when it was introduced, was that you do not need online access to the repo server most of the time. So what ? That's not how most people prefer to use it.
So those people are using the tool incorrectly, and would have a much better experience if they used it as designed. If everyone was running around using screwdriver handles to pound in nails, that wouldn't make it reasonable to say that any new screwdriver company has to have 5 lb handles.
They're not. They're using it very correctly, by choosing to ignore a capability that's irrelevant to them.
> If everyone was running around using screwdriver handles to pound in nails
Stop thinking by analogy. It harms your ability to think correctly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems fair to me, they're a nonprofit that exists in our lived reality and not an abusive monopolist that can literally throw a billion dollars to subsidize loss leaders. All it shows the world is why there needs to be a VAT like tax against US digital services to help drive a public option for developers. There's no reason why the people can't make our own solutions rather than be confined to abusive private US tech…
Adding taxes to things does not help anyone and goes against free choice. A better alternative would be to create the incentives so that companies like these can be born in Europe.
You are against democracy, I am not. Democracy has led to some of the best advances of civilization, all oligarchies have done is introduce mass poverty, mass misery, and mass death.
At least with democracy we went to the moon for mankind, not shareholders.