In the wake of the “GitHub CEO stepped down, no longer independent” news, I’m reminded that not enough people know about @Codeberg — free Git hosting run by a non-profit organization.

No tracking, no ads, no corporate buyout risk. Just open-source, community-driven software hosting.

Give it a try → https://codeberg.org

#opensource #freesoftware #git #devcommunity #indieweb #decentralization

Codeberg.org

Codeberg is a non-profit community-led organization that aims to help free and open source projects prosper by giving them a safe and friendly home.

Codeberg.org

I should have added: Codeberg's focus is on public repositories / FOSS software. From the FAQ:

"Codeberg's mission is to promote free/libre software. [..] If you do not contribute to any free/libre software project at all, Codeberg is unfortunately not the right place for you."

@lutzhuehnken But maybe SourceHut is: https://sr.ht/
sourcehut hub

@lutzhuehnken public code on codeberg and selfhosting forgejo for private code feels fine to me.
@lutzhuehnken right, but it's FOSS only. No private repos. That's not a bad thing in and of itself, but it's not for everyone. It doesn't suit my needs, as it happens, but I wish it every success.
@Hyperlynx While I agree that their main target is FOSS, they do have private repos. I think they even had free private repos before Github did.

@lutzhuehnken Huh. Interesting. I guess their FAQ must be out of date

https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#how-about-private-repositories%3F

It reads:

Codeberg's mission is to promote free/libre software. Keeping software private is obviously not our primary use case, but we acknowledge that private repositories are useful or necessary at times.

The rules of thumb are:

If you are a contributor to free/libre software projects, we allow up to 100 MB of private content for your convenience. Use it for your personal notes, your side project or any other you want to keep private.
I need more clarification on this rule!

If your private content is strictly required for a free/libre software project (like team-internal discussions, preparation of security patches, or preparing a release for a limited amount of time), private content will also be tolerated.

If you use more than 100 MB of private storage for the use cases mentioned earlier, please send us a request and we can evaluate it.

If you do not contribute to any free/libre software project at all, Codeberg is unfortunately not the right place for you. However, check out the alternatives, we're sure you'll find a cozy place for your work.

Frequently Asked Questions | Codeberg Documentation

@lutzhuehnken @Hyperlynx This entry was last updated yesterday. ~n
@lutzhuehnken @Hyperlynx We did not change our stance, we just clarified it further for the public. ~n

@Hyperlynx I apologize, you're right of course. I hadn't read the FAQ, it's pretty clear:

> If you do not contribute to any free/libre software project at all, Codeberg is unfortunately not the right place for you.

@lutzhuehnken are you involved in FOSS projects? Maybe that's why you've got the "private repos" option available
@Hyperlynx I want to say yes, but it's really not to an extend that warrants any preferential treatment. Are you saying you don't have the checkbox at all? I'm having a hard time imagining @Codeberg doing "background checks" on their users' contributions.

@lutzhuehnken @Hyperlynx Indeed – it is too much volume. We just have a set of rules and hope that a user will do what they think is right. We have a relative amount of lenience (e.g. we won't get angry if you got to 110 MiB and you didn't request that extra 10 MiB).

(As in: Please don't make a private backup of your entire PC in a private repository though, we will notice that eventually and we don't like it when donated money is used that way. :D) ~n

@lutzhuehnken @Hyperlynx And when I say "trusting one to do the right thing": Normally, the users that are worried about potentially breaking the rule are not the ones to completely disregard them to an incredible degree, so. ~n

@Codeberg oh, my guess was that you added folks to have private repos based on whether they're contributors to this thing or other, and that @lutzhuehnken was one.

I think I've drastically underestimated the size of the FOSS-sphere, such that I thought that was feasible :)

@Codeberg @lutzhuehnken @Hyperlynx One could do what I do is use Forgejo for things not quite ready to be public, but also use Codeberg things that are finished and relatively small in file size.

@Codeberg @lutzhuehnken @Hyperlynx For instance, there is this one gem for a DSL I'm working on, I'm considering local hosting, just to make sure its not bugging or nothing breaks when using it.

( I'm not entirely sure what size is normal for DSLs. )

@Hyperlynx huh? You can put private repos on there just fine

@Hyperlynx ah I just found their rules here: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/TermsOfUse.md

I suppose that might not work for some commercial projects indeed. But you can always host your own Forgejo if you wanted 😁

org/TermsOfUse.md at main

org - Official Codeberg Documents and their unofficial translations.

Codeberg.org
@codecat read the rest the thread...
@lutzhuehnken @Codeberg we really consider going back self-hosting; but can‘t decide if going with #gitlab or #gitea
@datenschauer Have you considered https://forgejo.org ?
Forgejo – Beyond coding. We forge.

Forgejo is a self-hosted lightweight software forge. Easy to install and low maintenance, it just does the job.

@lutzhuehnken hmm 🧐 actually not. Gotta look into that, too. Any „obvious“ advantages?
@datenschauer I mentioned it because the thread started with Codeberg, and this is what Codeberg runs. Maybe that gives some additional confidence with regards to fit-for-purpose. It's a fork of Gitea: https://forgejo.org/compare-to-gitea/#why-was-forgejo-created
Comparison with Gitea | Forgejo – Beyond coding. We forge.

Exclusively free software

@datenschauer They're working on adding a lot of neat federated repo stuff that looks promising 😁

@lutzhuehnken @Codeberg
And even fewer people know that git hosting is an add on, not a part of git.

Or that you can put a git repository on a bog standard webserver.

@lutzhuehnken Personally, I think not enough people are aware of `git init --bare` either...

@lutzhuehnken @Codeberg

Bookmarking for future use. Thanks for the share

@lutzhuehnken @Codeberg can we signal also GNU Savannah? No?
codebycandle

Codeberg is a non-profit, community-led organization that aims to help free and open source projects prosper by giving them a safe and friendly home.

Codeberg.org

@lutzhuehnken
Interesting timing. Today was the day that I migrated 100+ repositories from GitHub to Codeberg. I found this tool (just need the main script) https://github.com/LionyxML/migrate-github-to-codeberg - created tokens on GitHub and Codeberg and it was done. Now going back to delete GitHub repos.

@Codeberg @siracusa

GitHub - LionyxML/migrate-github-to-codeberg: Effortlessly migrate GitHub repositories to Codeberg! Seamlessly transfer project. Powered by Bash, curl, and jq.

Effortlessly migrate GitHub repositories to Codeberg! Seamlessly transfer project. Powered by Bash, curl, and jq. - LionyxML/migrate-github-to-codeberg

GitHub

@lutzhuehnken @Codeberg looks cool. I made an account to try it as an alternative to GitHub.

It looks like they don't have gist-like functionality -- is there something similar available elsewhere? What do you use for posting code snippets and similar things?

@ddrake It seems there's a pull request that would introduce gists, but it lost momentum before it was merged. Someone would have to pick it up and reopen it. https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6125#issuecomment-5389782
WIP: feat: Add Gists

This PR adds Gist support to Forgejo. Gists are small Git Repos. They are used to share Codesnipets. ### Implementation: - Each Gist has it's own random UUID (e.g. `7f4d4b2b`). They can be accessed using the `/gists/{gistuuid}` route. - You can have multiple Gists with the same Name (e.g. Lo...

Codeberg.org