Only noticed it today. I guess years of adblocking made me ultra sensitive to ads that this one stuck out like a sore thumb.
It is quite antithetical to the principles of FOSS to rely on a platform that pushes ads. It’s unfortunate that we settled on github but it is what it is.
Isn’t the whole point of git that the repo is cloned in a million places. You can switch the remote repo really easily?
Maybe i’m wrong; I stopped using github years ago. And I don’t do a lot of collaborative stuff, so I’m happy with just local git + rsync, local backups for most things. Maybe it has loads of unique features I’ve never noticed.
I’m not saying the alternatives are necessarily better for every project. Maybe github really is best for some - but it is a choice of the project to use github. They can move if they prefer the set of features of another repository.
I’m not convinced by anyone using “critical mass” justification for choosing github, that sounds like stockholm syndrome even though you have a key to the door.
“Too lazy to switch” that’s legitimate; if a wee bit dissapointing.
“Doesn’t allow my special sauce proprietary licence” - well . . .
Github did a lot of work into making it incompatible with just git. Moving issues, wiki, projects etc. etc. Makes it not just a simple switch to another hoster.
Only noticed it today. I guess years of adblocking made me ultra sensitive to ads that this one stuck out like a sore thumb.
It is quite antithetical to the principles of FOSS to rely on a platform that pushes ads. It’s unfortunate that we settled on github but it is what it is.
it is what it is.Isn’t the whole point of git that the repo is cloned in a million places. You can switch the remote repo really easily?
Maybe i’m wrong; I stopped using github years ago. And I don’t do a lot of collaborative stuff, so I’m happy with just local git + rsync, local backups for most things. Maybe it has loads of unique features I’ve never noticed.
I’m sure there are ways to scrape other data off the platform too. For example:
https://docs.codeberg.org/advanced/migrating-repos/
I’m not saying the alternatives are necessarily better for every project. Maybe github really is best for some - but it is a choice of the project to use github. They can move if they prefer the set of features of another repository.
I’m not convinced by anyone using “critical mass” justification for choosing github, that sounds like stockholm syndrome even though you have a key to the door.
“Too lazy to switch” that’s legitimate; if a wee bit dissapointing.
“Doesn’t allow my special sauce proprietary licence” - well . . .
Github did a lot of work into making it incompatible with just git. Moving issues, wiki, projects etc. etc. Makes it not just a simple switch to another hoster.
You can always clone it and use services like gitlab or codeberg. Or host your own Gitea instance.