71–80 of 225 posts
What do they mean by Fast? In terms of website performance?
I'm guessing they mean that, but according to ForgePerf, GitHub is better in that regard. https://forgeperf.org/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Services don't need to handle every single use case to be viable alternatives. GitHub does host proprietary software, but it is most well known for being a place to collaborate on free and open source software. Codeberg addresses this primary use case in a more focused way than GitHub intends to, and because of this, Codeberg is an excellent alternative to GitHub.
This sort of myopic, self-important, holier-than-thou perspective is why the open source community is so rarely successful in anything it tries to do for itself. Whatever you think Github's most known or most useful featureset is, the fact of the matter is it dominates because they don't draw philosophical lines in the sand and exclude people as a result. It's a big tent, all are welcome, and as a result, it has near…
To be a bit more cynical, Github alternatives are a dime a dozen. It's not clear to me that their market segmentation is hurting them. It seems to me that it's the only thing that's putting them on the map, otherwise they would just be a drop in the ocean.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sort of myopic, self-important, holier-than-thou perspective is why the open source community is so rarely successful in anything it tries to do for itself. Whatever you think Github's most known or most useful featureset is, the fact of the matter is it dominates because they don't draw philosophical lines in the sand and exclude people as a result. It's a big tent, all are welcome, and as a result, it has near…
> all are welcome Except for those who don't want their code to be used for training proprietary AI models.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing they mean that, but according to ForgePerf, GitHub is better in that regard. https://forgeperf.org/
fwiw there's a bug in the system which updates this page and it has grown rather stale. (author of this website)
> Our mission is to support the creation and development of Free Software; therefore we only allow repos licensed under an OSI/FSF-approved license. For more details see Licensing article. However, we sometimes tolerate repositories that aren't perfectly licensed and focus on spreading awareness on the topic of improper FLOSS licensing and its issues. If you aren't doing FOSS software and aren't "tolerated" you aren'…
People don't seem to realize the risk of centralizing on a single provider and solution. Currently, it's like 90% of the FOSS projects are hosted on GitHub. It all seems smooth and all until one day you log in to their platform and find yourself essentially shunned-off from collaborating on FOSS scene [1] . I'm grateful Codeberg, sourcehut and other alternatives exist. One nitpick from my experience: Codeberg's stati…
It turns out most don't care.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do if they are advertising as an alternative - that is specifically inviting comparisons.
They advertise themselves as an alternative to GitHub for FOSS projects. Nothing wrong with that.
Disclaimer: I just love what they do, I am not part of the team and don't hold any of their tokens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sort of myopic, self-important, holier-than-thou perspective is why the open source community is so rarely successful in anything it tries to do for itself. Whatever you think Github's most known or most useful featureset is, the fact of the matter is it dominates because they don't draw philosophical lines in the sand and exclude people as a result. It's a big tent, all are welcome, and as a result, it has near…
What if your goal is not being successful in term of absolute number of users no matter what but instead to promote something? It's fortunate that sometimes people refuse to build big tents and instead push for a better world. > They need to understand that contributions and use are driven by utility and convenience and economics, not morality You are wrong. GNU's whole existence is for moral reasons, and their tools…
In general I prefer if people keep their politics out of IT infrastructure. We don't all agree on what makes the world better and what makes it worse.
That said, I don't have a problem with this particular project. It's absolutely fine to create a git hosting solution specifically for open source as open source is itself a very big tent spanning a wide range of ideologies and groups that are otherwise hostile towards each other.
It is in fact commercial closed source software that is increasingly subject to political restrictions that are justified by supposedly making the world a better place.