this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
255 points (91.0% liked)

Open Source

31359 readers
227 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

First, they restricted code search without logging in so I'm using sourcegraph But now, I cant even view discussions or wiki without logging in.

It was a nice run

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TootSweet 48 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I moved all my open source projects to Gitlab the day Microsoft announced they were acquiring Github.

(I wish in retrospect I'd taken the time to research and decide on the right host. I likely would have gone to Codeberg instead of Gitlab had I done so. But Gitlab's still better than Github. And I don't really know for sure that Codeberg was even around back when Microsoft acquired Github.)

[–] [email protected] 23 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

My first impression of gitlab was offputting because I was using hardened firefox and couldnt get past through cloudflare so I ended up using github. It was also better ui wise but now its just a mess

Edit: slowly i'm starting to move everything to codeberg

[–] grue 14 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I'm OOTL. Why is Codeberg better than GitLab?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)
  1. It is FOSS while GitLab EE is not.
  2. It supports a lot of atifact repository formats while GitLab only docker registry.
  3. It is a non-commercial project.
[–] superbirra 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
  1. It supports a lot of atifact repository formats while GitLab only docker registry.

not true https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/packages/package_registry/supported_package_managers.html

that said, I hate gitlab and their commercial choices, they must die

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Thank you I missed when they added this. I only track a very old FR for rpm support and was sure that situation is similar with other repos. However gitea/forgejo supports more formats including rpm.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Codeberg is ran by a German nonprofit. GitLab is publically-traded on NASDAQ.

[–] TootSweet 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm not really sure it is. I just wish I'd shopped around before jumping to Gitlab, really.

It kindof feels like Gitlab's aims are more commercial and Codeberg's are more in line with the FOSS movement, but that's just a vague sense I have based on things I've seen but no longer remember specifically.

CalcProgrammer1's response to my post seems pretty informative and apropos, though.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Codeberg us really new, i think like 2 years. Since covid for sure.

[–] TootSweet 4 points 10 months ago

Ah. Good to know. I don't feel so bad about going with Gitlab now.

[–] BurnoutDV 3 points 10 months ago

I registered there june 2020 so longer than that

[–] akrot 6 points 10 months ago

The landscape is changing so fast thanks to LLMs, everything is becoming gated behind logins. Thanks ChatGPT.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Make the move from Gitlab to Codeberg in the last few days: really simple to do, give it a try ;-)

[–] TootSweet 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, good thought. The only reason I haven't is just because I worry that moving constantly might deter people from using any of my FOSS projects. Just seems like it could be considered a red flag (a sign of a "bad" or poorly-managed project) to some. (And... well... given that I didn't do the research when I moved those projects, it wouldn't be an entirely inaccurate conclusion to draw.)

Oh, I guess also I'd need to log back into my Github and change everything that says "moved to Gitlab" to say "moved to Codeberg" and update links. (I literally force-pushed to overwrite the entire history of my Github projects with a single commit each with just a README that says it moved to Gitlab with a link.)

Plus, if I really looked into it, I might decide I'd prefer to self-host on something like Gitea.

I guess all that to say I'd definitely want to put more thought into it before migrating any particular place a second time. Doing the actual move is indeed the easy part, but there's a lot of thought and research to do before that. And a lot of meta-considerations to take into account.

Sounds like you like Codeberg, though. Just out of curiosity, what sold you on Codeberg?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Sounds like you like Codeberg, though. Just out of curiosity, what sold you on Codeberg?

Basically the fact that they are in Europe and for now they are free (even if I am planning to contribute some euros) and without all the "every site need to be a social network" facade (like Github).
All the features I need are present and I were not using the missing one anyway (like the CI). And I like to support an EU company ;-)

Additionally it is a couple of years that I am trying to move away from US companies for every service I use, the move from Gitlab to Codeberg is the last one and came natural.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I still left my old and unmaintained projects on GitHub but I moved all my active projects to GitLab and any new projects go there too. I have them auto mirrored back to GitHub though as the more mirrors the better. I also recently set up a Codeberg mirror for some of my projects, though GitLab's CI is what is keeping me on GitLab even though they nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back. Still hate them for that and if Codeberg gets a solid CI option, leaving GitLab would make me happy. They too have seen quite a lot of enshittification in the years since Microsoft bought GitHub.

[–] baronvonj 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back.

Did they just reduce quotas (minutes?, cache storage?) or did they remove features? I've always used self-hosted runner

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Drastically nerfed the quotas. FOSS projects with a valid license used to have GitLab Premium access to shared runners and now even FOSS projects with a valid license get a rather useless 400 minutes. They also require new accounts to add CC info just to use that paltry sum which means FOSS projects can't rely on CI passing on forks to ensure a merge request passes the checks before merging, as even if you have project specific runners set up forks don't use them and neither to MRs.

I wish companies didn't offer what they can't support from the beginning rather than this embrace, extend, extinguish shit. I guess in GitLab's case there was no extend, it was just embrace FOSS projects and let them set up CI pipelines and get projects depending on the shared CI runners as part of merge request workflow for a few years and then extinguish by yoinking that access away and fucking over everyone's workflow, leaving us scrambling to set up project side runners and ruining checks on MRs.

[–] superbirra 1 points 10 months ago

They also require new accounts to add CC

just FYI you can still register w/o a cc but the option is hidden, only reachable via 'sign in' and then 'register': https://gitlab.com/users/sign_up

that said they're shit and need to die