What about #CI on #Codeberg?

We are providing access to our #WoodpeckerCI instance to those who need it, some caveats still apply.

Also, you can read about the upcoming #ForgejoActions.

Check out our docs to learn more about the state of CI on Codeberg: https://docs.codeberg.org/ci/

Working with Codeberg's CI | Codeberg Documentation

@Codeberg Woodpecker has been working great for me!
@daviwil thoughts on it vs SrcHut?
@fosskers You mean just as a CI system? I haven't used Sourcehut Build in a while, but it was pretty easy. Woodpecker is nice because you can use arbitrary Docker containers from Docker Hub to run your CI steps. Easier to create your own custom images that have all dependencies ready so that the job runs super fast.
@daviwil @fosskers i like builds.sr.ht because its just my normal workflow + a ~10 line yaml file

@rml @fosskers Woodpecker would also fit that definition. Here's how I auto-publish websites generated with `org-publish`:

https://codeberg.org/SystemCrafters/systemcrafters-site/src/branch/master/.woodpecker.yml

Most of the lines here are just `git` incantations.

Another example of building a CMake project:

https://codeberg.org/mesche/mesche/src/commit/f236a73cd80a39ba9c42f19f9f83a0b5bef3554c/.woodpecker.yml#L1-L8

Using a pre-configured Docker image with GCC and CMake already set up makes it a lot simpler.

systemcrafters-site

The official System Crafters website!

Codeberg.org
@daviwil @fosskers this is the thing, I love #srht but lack of org support is a major hassel

@rml Codeberg supports Org file preview well enough, but they use a Go-based HTML exporter so it's a little janky and inaccurate. Better than nothing, though!

@fosskers

@daviwil @fosskers i don't need much tbh, and i assume its better than pandoc org->md, which is what i use with sr.ht (probably to my disadvantage)