116 comments

[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 102 ms ] thread
I'm happy to see the move. Codeberg is probably a more stable/long-term solution than SourceHut as the founder is slightly unhinged (but love what he has built). Honestly, either would have been great choices.

More opensource projects should move off GitHub. I moved off it myself.

It's a pity that the GitHub repository is not mirrored, probably making downstreams broken.

Good move anyway.

It forces people to update their fetch URL to the proper authoritative repo, which is a good thing.
> As a bonus, we look forward to fewer violations (exhibit A, B, C) of our strict no LLM / no AI policy, which I believe are at least in part due to GitHub aggressively pushing the “file an issue with Copilot” feature in everyone’s face.

Also, the big part of that issue is people are incentivized to make their GitHub profile look good to have a higher chance of getting hired. Any non-mainstream platform is not as compelling to get social credits.

When the metrics becomes a target, ladida. GitHub profiles are utterly meaningless to me, speaking as someone that was hiring folks in 2023–4.

Perhaps we need an app to keep track of bad job candidates. We can gossip about them and such. I mean, we did that for an entire gender (sex?), let's go make a unicorn.

Biting the hand that fed you. I hope he's going to donate some of the money is getting begging to codeberg in return of their services.
> Effective immediately, I have made ziglang/zig on GitHub read-only, and the canonical origin/master branch of the main Zig project repository is https://codeberg.org/ziglang/zig.git.

If there is one benefit in moving from GitHub it is certainly avoiding receiving AI slop issues on GitHub.

Github was on the decline anyway in the past 5 years, it's time for an alternative and we'll see. Would rather it being Codeberg over something like Sourcehut.

I don't particularly like Zig, actually I don't like the language. But I have to admit, it's a bold move, free software projects should be encouraged to do the same.
Calling the people who work on GitHub “losers” is not cool.
Came hear and read “GitHub isn’t a good guy anymore” (not the first time, and seems to be increasing in frequency).

It’s like sourceforge all over again. History rhymes with itself, and enshitification has been added to dictionaries for a good reason.

As a once upon a time avid slashdotter, makes me wonder if some day, HN will go the same route.

What's the main diff between the different repos? I would think whoever keeps the repo free of malicious code is the best. A big player like GH should have an advantage on that. Also not intentional malicious code uploads, but vulnerable code should be detected and reported to tyhe submitters.
For a while now I've been dual hosting my projects on both Github and Codeberg and adding a note in the README's [1] explaining the situation. I donate to Codeberg and run my own self-hosted forgejo runners for actions, and maintain much of my testing on both platforms.

I push to Github and then an Action mirrors the code to Codeberg automatically.

I'd fully switch over except practically everybody is on Github and nobody is on Codeberg, and I've had more outages with Codeberg than Github over the past year.

It really feels like there could be some good tooling in this area to make working through multiple Forge's easier and not force things to be centralized so much. Hopefully more projects moving out of Github makes it easier and gets more people contributing elsewhere.

[1] https://codeberg.org/arcuru/eidetica#repository

Hopefully more projects can follow! Codeberg has a far more secure foundation to avoid unethical practices on users.
I don’t have strong opinions about Zig or Codeberg, but I find the self-described status of the latter’s infrastructure concerning[1]: they’re seemingly running faulty hardware in production with limited redundancy, and are actively soliciting more hardware of unknown quality/reliability/provenance from their community. This is cool for a hobbyist project, but it doesn’t scream “stable platform for a post-GitHub world,” which is how I’ve seen Codeberg (aspirationally) described.

[1]: https://blog.codeberg.org/letter-from-codeberg-onwards-and-u...

Congratulations on the move!

> Thank you to the Forgejo contributors who helped us with our issues switching to the platform, as well as the Codeberg folks who worked with us on the migration

I'd love to see a writeup about these problems/solutions at some point.

Also take a look at sourcehut for those interested in an alternative
> remaining losers > created by monkeys

That just shows what kind of person they are, and makes me never want to use Zig, even hope for its failure.

Exhibit A is a github user joelreymont who seems to be making a habit of this behavior. He did a very similar spam on ocaml github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/14369
It is good to have alternatives to mega-corporations controlling the ecosystem.

Microsoft controlling GitHub is an issue, but one can see this issue emerging in different places too; see shopify puting pressure on the ruby ecosystem, ending with various developers who contributed to ruby (in particular via gems and bundler) no longer being accepted there (via RubyCentral's take-over, under shopify's directive and influence onto ruby). Many more examples can be given here. The thing is that money buys influence, ultimately dictating who can contribute and how. Python forcing mandatory 2FA onto all developers is also an example here - the hobbyist who just contributes code, has not really any benefit here, whereas corporations delegate more "security" onto unpaid folks.

Damn - Codeberg is snappy! It's as fast as Github used to be 10 years ago. Server rendered pages. No AJAX-style slow updates. Love it.
> Putting aside GitHub’s relationship with ICE, it’s abundantly clear that the talented folks who used to work on the product have moved on to bigger and better things, with the remaining losers eager to inflict some kind of bloated, buggy JavaScript framework on us in the name of progress.

This says more about the author than anything else.

PSA: Codeberg currently does not implement accessible account registration. It is impossible for screen reader users to make a Codeberg account due to the image-only captcha. There's a manual fallback path, but no idea how long that takes. I've been forced to use the Wikimedia one, and that was about 3 months. This has been pointed out to them many times, and it's seemingly not something they're willing to fix.

If you didn't know what Codeberg's political stance really is and how they treat the inconvenient part of their userbase... I guess now you know.

Codeberg has a yearly fee via euro payment method or manual wire transfer. Membership requires manual approval.

Edit: you can register without membership.