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?

  • cerement@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        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

        • PlexSheep@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s correct, but it still can be separated without too much effort, unlike if it would just be one thing.

    • refalo
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Codeberg and Vervis are working on federated git which largely solves this problem IMO.