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

371–380 of 380 posts

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#371

Post by account42 »

Daviey wrote: post #175
giancarlostoro wrote: post #2

Everyone seems to be leaving GitHub, and forgetting the entire spirit of what git is in my eyes. Git was always meant to be decentralized, the problem here is that all the tooling around git was centralized to GitHub because it was a cleaner experience, they scaled nicely, and were properly maintained. I would prefer to still see mirrors on GitHub that are auto-synched because I've seen projects for years either self…

This was the original model of launchpad.net, it was supposed to be a hub of Foss that pulled in from the decentralised VCS's, and provide them all via bzr. But bzr lost the battle, Canonical was slow to adopt Git, lack of investment in the platform, so it was another lunch that got taken from them.

Canonical should just rename themselves to Not Invented Here. Their inability to work with others and instead reinventing the same thing badly is beyond comical at this point.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#372

Post by account42 »

dark-star wrote: post #224
giancarlostoro wrote: post #2

Everyone seems to be leaving GitHub, and forgetting the entire spirit of what git is in my eyes. Git was always meant to be decentralized, the problem here is that all the tooling around git was centralized to GitHub because it was a cleaner experience, they scaled nicely, and were properly maintained. I would prefer to still see mirrors on GitHub that are auto-synched because I've seen projects for years either self…

That "everyone" is just a small, vocal community if you look at the total numbers of repos on GitHub (which is still climbing)[1] Yes, I understand that people are upset about the Copilot issues and maybe even the "frequent" outages (which usually only affect fringe parts of the site not everyone uses daily) It's good that there are other solutions (forge, sourcehut, whatever) but most projects are still alive and ve…

Why do you think total numbers of repos is a relevant metric here? If anything, the slop spam on GitHub is a problem and a core part of why people are leaving.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#373

Post by Daviey »

account42 wrote: post #371
Daviey wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was the original model of launchpad.net, it was supposed to be a hub of Foss that pulled in from the decentralised VCS's, and provide them all via bzr. But bzr lost the battle, Canonical was slow to adopt Git, lack of investment in the platform, so it was another lunch that got taken from them.

Canonical should just rename themselves to Not Invented Here. Their inability to work with others and instead reinventing the same thing badly is beyond comical at this point.

Interesting, got some examples of things they reinvented?

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#374

Post by account42 »

the__alchemist wrote: post #186
giancarlostoro wrote: post #2

Everyone seems to be leaving GitHub, and forgetting the entire spirit of what git is in my eyes. Git was always meant to be decentralized, the problem here is that all the tooling around git was centralized to GitHub because it was a cleaner experience, they scaled nicely, and were properly maintained. I would prefer to still see mirrors on GitHub that are auto-synched because I've seen projects for years either self…

I do not mean for this to come across as a nit, but think it's worth stating explicitly: > Everyone seems to be leaving GitHub A small minority is leaving Github; this group is more likely to write articles about the choice than those who still use Github.

It always starts with a small minority. In this case, it already includes some very well known projects.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#375

Post by account42 »

jimmaswell wrote: post #104
sc68cal wrote: post #34

I have also moved my git repositories to a self-hosted NUC. I have not yet bothered with a HTTP frontend to share it with the world, mostly because I don't want to provide AI scrapers with content and don't want to put the work in to block them. It's a shame that all these companies that benefited from open source have poisoned the industry like this

Why would someone gladly provide their work as open source but draw the line at AI reading it and using that knowledge to help more programmers later? It makes no sense to me. I actively want all of my code to be read by AI.

Why would someone volunteer at a soup kitchen but not want to donate free labor to the canning factory? I'm pretty sure you know the answer to both questions.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#376

Post by account42 »

bee_rider wrote: post #72
echelon wrote: post #46

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…

One problem with all of these licenses is that however the code is available, we can’t practically prevent the LLM companies from training on it (especially given that they don’t respect IP laws anyway). No idea what to do about this. Wonder if communities will have to move to some kind of fractured system where source is gated behind a login. Rough times out there for transparent organizations.

> No idea what to do about this.

Same thing book writers did when the printing press brought the possibility for others to copy their books for free.

There are also other options that have been used historically but they tend to be a lot more bloody.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#377

Post by anarticle »

account42 wrote: post #368
anarticle wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about offloading blame. If a server nukes, it's on infra to get a guy to unscrew it. If a service nukes, infra guy says "welp it's down", keeps on clicking. It doesn't matter what happens 6m-2y down the road, your odds of being laid off or job hopping are high in the current regime so this all makes sense. You pay some amount of your budget to make your life "easier" in the now. The trouble comes 2-5y down the l…

> tbh, migration is not that hard, but the org will act like it is It actually would be hard to impossible if done properly - meaning no lost information and no dead links.

Not your problem under the hot potato model. It's not impossible and here's the other thing: it often doesn't matter if things get broken to your megacorp as long as you keep up appearances with clients.

Sorry if this sounds really grim / cynical, I've simply seen enough of these kinds of migrations to know that it is fundamentally opposite of my perception of engineering philosophy. It often becomes more of a question of business rather than correctness. (Can we simply fire the smaller customers? -> yes.)

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#378

Post by NeutralCrane »

account42 wrote: post #364
NeutralCrane wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP law is a farce, and the open source licenses are built upon that farce. If a single good thing comes out of LLMs, it will be forcing society to recognize “intellectual property” for the dystopic stupidity that it is. I doubt it though.

That is a pipe dream. The current direction is the opposite of that - knowledge becomes even more centralized and only rented out to individuals.

Knowledge being rented out to individuals is the status quo. Already there are court rulings dictating that “training” on data is legal, but model weights also are non-copyrightable, which seems like a step in the direction of sanity.

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#379

Post by dark-star »

account42 wrote: post #372
dark-star wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That "everyone" is just a small, vocal community if you look at the total numbers of repos on GitHub (which is still climbing)[1] Yes, I understand that people are upset about the Copilot issues and maybe even the "frequent" outages (which usually only affect fringe parts of the site not everyone uses daily) It's good that there are other solutions (forge, sourcehut, whatever) but most projects are still alive and ve…

Why do you think total numbers of repos is a relevant metric here? If anything, the slop spam on GitHub is a problem and a core part of why people are leaving.

that might be true, yes, but still: the burden of proof (that "github is dying") lies with the original poster. A statement like "last week, these 3 big projects left GitHub" is not that

Re: Leaving GitHub for Forgejo

#380

Post by gchamonlive »

account42 wrote: post #367
troad wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be generous to OP, none of this is intrinsic to FOSS. I write a library. I put it up online, for other people to use, if they like. At what point did I assume any responsibility to play nice with others? Or work with others at all? There's FOSS licenses, and then there's the social expectations around collaborative online development, and the latter is nowhere implied in the former. FOSS was not historically weigh…

Spot on. And with the slop pull request currently plaguing the open collaboration model I foresee more projects moving (back) to the take-it-or-leave-it model.

Late to the party, but you can also do KYC on contributors, no need for black and white take it or leave it return to the dark ages.
Post reply on HN