GitHub is battling outages, security issues, and a talent exodus.
    • Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      3·
      2 小时前

      Oh common it’s not like there’s an org for mountains of code. A codeberg.org basically.

      Or a method to forge jo own code repos just like that, just for dev. A … forgejo.dev … No that would be crazy. Let’s rather stick with Microsoft - after all, nothing they ever touched was bad for their user base, ever.

  • skami@lemmy.ml
    12·
    7 小时前

    Seems there’s lot of mess in the company all because of Microsoft or name it greed or late stage capitalism but still something tells me GitHub is just too important to lose dominance in next few years, after that if any other company takes over it’ll probably be gitlab but it’s really hard to speculate on this kind of things, I hope Microsoft leaves GitHub alone, they probably will fix themselves, lot’s of developers depend on Github and migration is not easy thing for big repos I expect.

    • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      10·
      5 小时前

      When I first became familiar with the existence of free and open source software, GitHub did not exist yet. The most popular similar website was SourceForge. (Do many people much younger than me even know that exists?)

      If things could change once, they can change again.

    • Caveman@lemmy.world
      1·
      4 小时前

      It’ll not be gitlab, gitlab is fine but the UI sucks and no improvements in sight.

      Forgejo/Codeberg is the one that will take over in the coming decade.

      • ISO@lemmy.zip
        3·
        2 小时前

        Forgejo/Codeberg is the one that will take over in the coming decade.

        This is both wishful thinking, and would reintroduce the same problem anyway (centralization) if it would happen (the codeberg part).

        I don’t take seriously individuals celebrating a move to self-hosting either. While it may look cool and ideally liberating at first, infrastructure/hosting responsibility has worse bus factors and burnout than actual development (not to mention actual monetary costs). It’s safe to assume that any code self-hosted has a high chance of becoming unreachable in 1-3 years (and yes, exceptions exist).

        Solutions like radicale don’t help with unpopular repos, as you would again get a (hosting) bus factor of 1 (the dev/seeder), if that.

        A theoretical solution leveraging an anonymous encrypted distributed storage network for repos would help keeping code alive for a while (after the bus hits). But unpopular content will eventually fizzle out, out of the network.

        Multiple congregations of Forgejo (or something similar) communities forming would be cool. But the technology that would help them form one social block with network effects doesn’t exist*. And what’s proposed here and there (like federation for issues) doesn’t cover the code itself. And even if we get far in that direction, instance drama incidents, and attempts at exerting control over “the network” will inescapably appear.

        * I don’t know if tangled counts. But judging by the amount of love 😑 people shoe the AT protocol, it may as well not exist.

        tl;dr: Codeberg will not become GH-big. And if it did, it wouldn’t be a good thing. And yet there is no ideal alternative to central forges anyway, not even a theoretical one.

      • onlinepersona@programming.dev
        3·
        3 小时前

        You think it sucks because you’re used to GitHub’s interface. I really dislike the github interface after having left it a few years ago. Gitlab’s interface is, to me, so much better and a breath of fresh air (even though it might look like the old old Github).

        As for forgejo, I agree, once they get functional federation and a good CI (not a shitty Github actions clone), github and Gitlab can really fuck off. Gitlab might become a “competitor” once they have federation, but they only will do that if forgejo takes off sue to federation.