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.

  • BartyDeCanter@piefed.socialEnglish
    14·
    3 days ago
    1. CI runners - GH offers free CI runners for a variety of OSs. I can automatically test my code on Linux/Mac/Windows for free on GH. No one else offers that because it is very expensive. You need windows licenses and Apple hardware. And Codeberg only offers it on Linux after a back and forth discussion. Plus, while simple GH CI Actions move to Forgejo Actions pretty easily, more complex ones require a complete rewrite.
    2. Better issue tracking - FJ’s issue tracking is pretty good, and perfetcly fine for small projects, but GH’s is better.
    3. Better CLI - fj is decent and improving, but gh is better
    4. Better project pages - Codeberg Pages is decent and improving, but GH Pages are better.
    5. Lots of other small things - Codeberg is decent and improving, GH is better.

    For most people, myself included, the only thing that really matters are the CI runners. But that is also the one thing that costs the most to support.