Folks who have moved a project from #GitHub to #Codeberg.
-
@santisbon Expect engagement to drop off as fewer people can be bothered to sign up for a Codeberg account. This could be a feature or a bug for you.
-
@markstos certainly a downside but hopefully it will be mitigated once Forgejo implements ActivityPub so accounts on separate instances can collaborate. Not sure if Codeberg does the kind of vulnerability scanning that GitHub does, though. That one is super useful and I'd miss it.
-
Armando :rick:replied to Armando :rick: last edited by [email protected]
Right now it looks like this for me:
GitHub
+ Private repos and projects
+ Vulnerability scanning with notifications
+ GitHub Actions widely used
- No Weblate instance included
- No federation (but huge user base)
- Your project's name is already taken as a username
Codeberg
- No private repos/projects or severely restricted
- No vulnerability scanning
- Forgejo Actions less widely used
+ Weblate instance included
+ Future ActivityPub federation in Forgejo (but still small user base)
+ Your project's name is probably available as a username
Also, if your project starts out as a fork of something else you'll want to be on the same platform as the original to easily sync your fork.
#git #GitHub #Codeberg -
@santisbon I can’t see how ActivityPub can offload work in some cases, but it’s also a whole second job for the server to do, to push and pull a bunch of data over that protocol, not all of which will even be used.
-
Henry Bley-Vromanreplied to Armando :rick: last edited by
@santisbon Codeberg has private repos and projects. Wasn't aware that the repo's visibility is a factor in its features or its projects' features. What are the "severe restrictions"?
I've found migrating GitHub Actions to Forgejo Actions straightforward. You can still `use` GitHub-hosted actions.
Forgejo Actions uses Docker. That's something I've wanted in GitHub Actions.
I've had hit-or-miss experience with local Forgejo Action runners.
Codeberg user Matrix seems pretty active
-
Armando :rick:replied to Henry Bley-Vroman last edited by
@olets from their FAQ:
"Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like storing secrets, team-internal discussions or hiding projects from the public until they're ready for usage and/or contribution."
docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#can-i-use-private-repositories-for-my-project%3F -
@markstos See forgefed.org for advantages of federation on software forges and the associated AP extension. Also, not all AP implementations have to use all AS2 types or provide data that won't be used.
-
@santisbon Nothing on that page suggests performance will be improved by adding ActivityPub.
-
Armando :rick:replied to Mark Stosberg last edited by
@markstos performance? I don't think anyone has argued it would have better performance; that's unrelated to collaboration over AP.
-
Mark Stosbergreplied to Armando :rick: last edited by
@santisbon Sorry, thought you were replying to my other comment.
Mark Stosberg (@[email protected])
@[email protected] Performance. Every page load on Codeberg seems noticeably slower. Maybe that can be fixed with donations for better hardware.
Urbanists.Social (urbanists.social)
Performance is already an issue with Codeberg. I doubt adding AP will help.
-
Armando :rick:replied to Mark Stosberg last edited by
@markstos ah yes, I was replying to the one about reduced engagement due to fewer people having accounts on Codeberg, where AP could help them collaborate even if they're on different Forgejo servers.