Sure, I know a lot of projects have been on GH since before MS bought it, but they've owned it for quite a while now, so we really should be seeing better migration out by now, no?

Codeberg is nonprofit which seems more in the spirit of the Linux ecosystem overall. GH is for-profit...

EDIT: All right, all right, I've gotten schooled. Thank you, O wise ones; I didn't realize how much Microsoft literally depends on Linux, among other things. I will proceed to shut up.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Momentum and time and effort to migrate.

And there's automated workflows such as GitHub Actions and ci/cd integrations that don't have 1-to-1 replacements, which would mean extra work (for quite strained teams of volunteers)

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Additionally, as a developer on a large open source project, the community is already established on GitHub. It would be incredibly risky to move it and hope everyone comes along.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I moved my projects and yes I had to make new runners and pipelines for forgejo but it's pretty much feature parity

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago

    Good for you, guess your setup is less complicated then.

    There's still plenty of stuff that is not a 1-to-1 drop in replacement, e.g. plenty use build previews from netlify, they have no drop-in for other providers so to get those you have to directly interact with the API instead, in a runner

  • source
  • parent