I’ve been on Codeberg for over a year now and the experience has been great. It has been around for a while, it’s fast, thanks to Forgejo, the self-hostable open-source software that Codeberg uses, which also offers great features.

However, it lacks a good CI/CD system. I feel like Woodpecker (the CI/CD system Codeberg uses) can’t do more complex things. Forgejo/Gitea have their own CI/CD system which is better, but Codeberg still uses Woodpecker.

But other than that, why isn’t Codeberg more widely adopted? Even privacy advocates continue to use GitHub, despite its acquisition by Microsoft. I agree with the sentiment that GitHub has a large user base, and its widespread adoption is undeniable, but I still think more people should try Codeberg or even self-host their own Forgejo/Gitea instances.

So, I’m curious to hear your perspective. What are the reasons that keep you tied to GitHub? Do the features and network outweigh the privacy concerns? Are there specific functionalities that you rely on and haven’t found elsewhere?

  • Lazycog@sopuli.xyz
    1·
    4 months ago

    I would have given it a go, but reading their terms it seems they don’t like people having non-foss code there, and I would like to have both my foss and non-foss projects together on one platform.

    I’ve been thinking about self-hosting forgejo though!

    Edit: I did move from GitHub to GitLab, but don’t really wanna stay on GitLab either.

  • witten@lemmy.world
    1·
    4 months ago

    I develop a moderately popular open source project and self-host it on Gitea. But I also mirror it on GitHub and accept PRs there. And one PR submitter on GitHub said they preferred to contribute there because that’s where potential employers look for open source activity.

    Could employers also look on Gitea/Forgejo? In theory, yes. But some of them literally ask for your GitHub profile on their application forms…

    • madnificent@lemmy.world
      1·
      4 months ago

      We also ask for a GitHub handle but when one supplies Codeberg or GitLab it’s seen as very positive. Might not be the case for standard HR though.

  • PlexSheep@infosec.pub
    1·
    4 months ago

    Holding back? I’m not held back. Codeberg would be a step back, I self host Forgejo and am so hyped up for forgefed.

    I set up mirrors for my more important stuff to Codeberg and GitHub for visibility.

    About CI/CD: does Codeberg not let you enable actions, which are basically the same as GitHub actions but for self hosting? That’s what I use for my self hosted CI. I think you can add your own workers for orgs, repos, and profiles too on Forgejo, should be doable on Codeberg too. (I don’t use Codeberg CI, only my own)

    • refalo@programming.dev
      0·
      4 months ago

      How do you feel about privacy/GDPR in relation to federated services like this? Seems a bit of a minefield and probably most all of those services are not technically legal.

      • PlexSheep@infosec.pub
        0·
        4 months ago

        Why exactly would it not be ok with the gdpr? I can’t think of anything right now. Having a few diverse isn’t really a new idea, it’s basically the www all over again and mastodon and lemmy &Co exist already.

        Or are you referring to registering CI workers? That might be a bit of a problem, yeah, as you’re basically giving the git hoster remote code execution (on a docker container). Not really a problem if you host your own of course.

        • refalo@programming.dev
          0·
          4 months ago

          For one there’s no incentive for individuals running an instance to care about compliance in the first place, regardless of the actual issues at play. One obvious issue that comes to mind is the right to be forgotten. FOSS software can be easily modified and if servers don’t comply with such requests properly then your rights are being violated and good luck doing anything useful about it.

            • tyler@programming.dev
              0·
              4 months ago

              It does. It applies to any service that has a single EU user. And that doesn’t mean someone in the EU. It means an EU citizen, even if they are living abroad.

                • tyler@programming.dev
                  0·
                  4 months ago

                  Anyone who ever hopes to actually move or operate in the EU will be forced to comply. So an instance owner in the fediverse might operate their instance out of the US. Then the US enacts some law to force handing over user data. The server owner wants to move (themselves or the server) to the EU. Well, they’re now fucked.

                  Or if an instance owner wants to sell something on the site, guess you’re not selling to 50% of your users.

  • cerement@slrpnk.net
    0·
    4 months ago

    mind share – GitHub is the Coca-Cola of git, Codeberg and SourceHut are the RC Colas – people are already on GitHub, their projects are already on GitHub, their workflows are already on GitHub, their friends are already on GitHub, their co-workers are already on GitHub, and on and on …

    it’s the same issue with Facebook – everyone knows Facebook is shit, but leaving Facebook means convincing your friends and family to leave Facebook, and convincing their friends and family to leave Facebook … outside of a global event like a pandemic, a nigh impossible task …

    • PlexSheep@infosec.pub
      0·
      4 months ago

      I disagree somewhat. In general, the network effect is very strong of course, but git is already decentralized. You can pretty much just git push to somewhere else or even use email.

      The rest is just (useful) extra stuff.

      • cerement@slrpnk.net
        1·
        4 months ago

        GitHub has managed to conflate “git” and “GitHub” in a lot of people’s minds (including people who should know better) – git may be decentralized, but to people who think git is GitHub, it’s meaningless