Oh common it’s not like there’s an org for mountains of code.
A codeberg.org basically.
Or a method to forge jo own code repos just like that, just for dev.
A … forgejo.dev … No that would be crazy. Let’s rather stick with Microsoft - after all, nothing they ever touched was bad for their user base, ever.
Forge federation can’t come soon enough. I love being able to host my own little projects on my own forge, but if anyone intended to open an issue or PR, they would currently need an account on my instance to do so.
Heck every conference I go to I pester Gitlab about it. It’s always “ehh it’s on the road map”. Honestly it really is the solution to that problem space
Codeberg is great, but let’s not pretend that it’s a replacement for GitHub. Notably they don’t allow private repos and can’t offer free CI (not in the same way as GitHub anyway). Plus, I don’t see how they would be immune to the slopnami either if they became popular.
Best case would be if GitHub survives and just improves their reliability. I would not be surprised if they start imposing some kind of stricter limits on free accounts though.
Codeberg is a non profit under German law. There won’t be openai “non profit but not really” bullshit.
And your point about CI Integration ins good example: There is no “free” CI.
GitHub lets you pay with their vendor lock-in and your data.
If that’s okay with you, that’s okay with me - but as a programming community as a whole ,especially FOSS side, this needs to go away.
The best case for me is that GitHub dies and its death is a wake-up call to decouple collaboration layers in a way that keeps them modular enough to not again rub into “too big or integrated to fail”.
And yes, I’m aware that this is 2/3 day dreaming. But that’s my best case association anyway :D
That’s fair it has loss leaders and network effects more so. The vendor lock in is non-git, non-ci side. So issues, orgs, etc.
Actually you can see where they embraced opensource vs extending solely by the degree it is vendor locked.
If they stole it, it’s a loss leader, if they made it, it’s vendor locked.
Yeah I would say issues are minimal lock-in since they barely have any features (just labels I guess?) and can easily be exported. CI must be the biggest lock-in. If you have a complex CI system that makes use of lots of third party actions it could be a decent amount of work to migrate it. But not a huge amount.
If only there were better, open-source, self-hostable alternatives… Wait, there are!
Oh common it’s not like there’s an org for mountains of code. A codeberg.org basically.
Or a method to forge jo own code repos just like that, just for dev. A … forgejo.dev … No that would be crazy. Let’s rather stick with Microsoft - after all, nothing they ever touched was bad for their user base, ever.
Forge federation can’t come soon enough. I love being able to host my own little projects on my own forge, but if anyone intended to open an issue or PR, they would currently need an account on my instance to do so.
Feel like half of lemmy is waiting for forgejo federation, lol.
Heck every conference I go to I pester Gitlab about it. It’s always “ehh it’s on the road map”. Honestly it really is the solution to that problem space
Codeberg is great, but let’s not pretend that it’s a replacement for GitHub. Notably they don’t allow private repos and can’t offer free CI (not in the same way as GitHub anyway). Plus, I don’t see how they would be immune to the slopnami either if they became popular.
Best case would be if GitHub survives and just improves their reliability. I would not be surprised if they start imposing some kind of stricter limits on free accounts though.
I fundamentally disagree on your conclusion.
Codeberg is a non profit under German law. There won’t be openai “non profit but not really” bullshit.
And your point about CI Integration ins good example: There is no “free” CI. GitHub lets you pay with their vendor lock-in and your data.
If that’s okay with you, that’s okay with me - but as a programming community as a whole ,especially FOSS side, this needs to go away.
The best case for me is that GitHub dies and its death is a wake-up call to decouple collaboration layers in a way that keeps them modular enough to not again rub into “too big or integrated to fail”.
And yes, I’m aware that this is 2/3 day dreaming. But that’s my best case association anyway :D
What vendor lock-in? GitHub barely has any.
That’s fair it has loss leaders and network effects more so. The vendor lock in is non-git, non-ci side. So issues, orgs, etc. Actually you can see where they embraced opensource vs extending solely by the degree it is vendor locked.
If they stole it, it’s a loss leader, if they made it, it’s vendor locked.
Yeah I would say issues are minimal lock-in since they barely have any features (just labels I guess?) and can easily be exported. CI must be the biggest lock-in. If you have a complex CI system that makes use of lots of third party actions it could be a decent amount of work to migrate it. But not a huge amount.
There are alternatives… until you care about your code not leaking out of your org