(note, the GitLab Enterprise Edition, which is provided to the public on gitlab.com, is (like GitHub) trade-secret, proprietary, vendor-lock-in software)
Isn't EE source-available but proprietary? Plus if you just use the free tier you're not using any enterprise features
Will things like setting up a "stack" in portainer on docker be able to use the github alternatives like codeberg? or will those kinds of things need to be rebuilt?
Anyone got a commmand line tool change all my stuff? Because if I have to do change all the remotes all the time, for dozens of projects I'm going to lose my mind.
Also the migration on gitlab/codeberg looked like an amount of effort that doesn't round down to zero.
I thought this was going to be a FOSS discussion, comparing GitHub and it's current owner - Microsoft - to the ethics of other hosting services like codeberg.org or something.
A lot of people associated with Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) have major objections to GitHub. Here's one summary: https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/
But the TLDR; version is roughly:
Your source hosted on GitHub is being used to train AI, and you are possibly giving up rights to algorithms you may have written (IANAL, and AI training is a fuzzy topic at the moment)
GitHub itself is proprietary, closed-source software, while they claim to be pro-FOSS. Aside from not being in the spirit of things, closed-source means you also don't know what happens with your code/data once up upload it.
Microsoft has a history of being anti-FOSS, while some people will say it's been changing, I think many are still rightfully concerned what their future decisions regarding GitHub might be, especially if they are a near-monopoly.
Alternative do exist, and some like codeberg.org are specifically open sourced, and pro-open source, so many people are pushing to move hosting away from GitHub and onto other options.
The previous Microsoft's CEO truly hates FOSS, famously calling it cancer. Then the next CEO reversed Microsoft's stance on FOSS, acquiring the largest FOSS collaboration site. Naturally, many view this move with suspicion since Microsoft has a history of embracing something only to extinguish it later.
Fuck that, I don't trust executables unless they're signed, downloaded securely (e.g. HTTPS), and I trust the source I downloaded them from. Anything else might as well be a virus. If I can't find a signed binary from a trustworthy source, I'm either not using it or I'm going to build it myself (after skimming through the code).
I'm looking forward to the Forgejo Federation to be completed.
It will be nice to not have to choose between self hosting your repository and having your repository discoverable.
I just store mine in memory (meat memory, not the computer stuff). If someone wants the source code I just tell them. Version control by oral tradition.
I get this is a meme, but the most successful projects are the ones that quickly get you running and are supportive to new users. I'll get off my soapbox.
I agree with GitHub being bad, but the meme's content is worse and I'm afraid that there are people who agree with it. I don't like GitHub or Microsoft but since I get their stuff for free I do use but I'd love to use something that's open and supports git properly.