91–100 of 225 posts
About 6 months ago, Codeberg removed the repository for the Wikiless project, and IIRC did not offer any explanation to the developer for about 2 weeks. The reason was a Wikimedia Foundation request. Edit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33101301
> 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'…
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> such a blatant clone of GitHub’s? I'm guessing for the same reason all cars have the steering wheel and turn signal switch in roughly the same place.
BitBucket and GitLab are more distinct and have made different decisions in some places, for better or worse. Forgejo is just a clone of GitHub with slightly different colors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
>It's fortunate that sometimes people refuse to build big tents and instead push for a better world. 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 its…
I find it interesting that people only ever say this when talking about free software initiatives. Nobody moans about software getting 'political' when talking about closed-source companies enforcing intellectual property laws that were literally written by politicians.
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.
It's only a great alternative if you believe GitHub deserves to die because it hosts everyone and making proprietary software should be made as difficult as possible. Which is the same as being against people making a living from building and selling software. ie you are against the existence of programming as a profession. In specifically that case this is superior to GitHub.
Geez, why so extreme? They choose whom they support for free, and they choose FLOSS projects with similar goals/philosophies. If your project has a different philosophy, fine, up to you, but it's not something they want to spend their time to support for free. You are welcome to go somewhere else, including going to or staying at GitHub.
Nobody wants anything "to die". It's about providing alternatives for people who are not entirely happy. If you are, fine, nobody forces you to anything. Just like you can't force the Codeberg people to provide something to you for free which they are not comfortable with.
I’m trying to migrate my personal repos from GitHub to Codeberg. The biggest challenge is to find a replacement for GitHub Actions (the free offering is so generous), and my current solution for that is to self-host an instance of Woodpecker CI [1]. I’d like to see even more diversity in Git hosting beyond “let’s all migrate from X to Y”, and for that to happen, Forgejo (the soft fork of Gitea that Codeberg runs) has…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's fortunate that sometimes people refuse to build big tents and instead push for a better world. 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 its…
You cannot remove politics from IT infrastructure. Politics is everywhere. Politics is deciding how we live together as a society; the very fact we're having this discussion is politics. It's the fable of being apolitical that is a mistake, because in doing so you are strengthening the status quo and prevent others from thinking about the situation and changing it.
I believe that this stance can be justified on a technical level that is only very remotely linked to the main political ideologies of our time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
>It's fortunate that sometimes people refuse to build big tents and instead push for a better world. 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 its…
Fine, then go somewhere else and don't use Codeberg. Your criticism is part of bringing politics into this. It's about freedom and choice. You have the choice to go somewhere else, nobody is forcing you.
I’m trying to migrate my personal repos from GitHub to Codeberg. The biggest challenge is to find a replacement for GitHub Actions (the free offering is so generous), and my current solution for that is to self-host an instance of Woodpecker CI [1]. I’d like to see even more diversity in Git hosting beyond “let’s all migrate from X to Y”, and for that to happen, Forgejo (the soft fork of Gitea that Codeberg runs) has…
HN talk about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34012307