what is the best alternative to github ? my main requirements are that

  1. it should be free, and
  2. it should not go down or get discontinued anytime soon
  • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
    4·
    1 year ago

    I am starting to get annoyed by Lemmy’s Active and Hot feeds recommending not things that are Hot or Active but instead threads from over a year ago with ONE new comment

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      1·
      2 years ago

      I do like codeberg a lot, but unfortunately they are harsh with taking down torrent-related projects. I had to move a few of my repos off there bc of it.

  • triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
    1·
    2 years ago

    another vote for Gitea - much easier to host than gitlab in my experience, lots of great features (e.g. it can work as a single sign on system for other apps, host docker images and PHP packages, and integrates well with Drone for CI/CD), and if you don’t wanna run it yourself I’ll also big up Codeberg as another person suggested

  • hfkldjbuq@beehaw.org
    1·
    2 years ago

    https://codeberg.org which is a non-profit organization. It is free of charge, so it is democratic enabling people to use its services. You can even join the foundation https://join.codeberg.org/

    BUT it uses Gitea, which registered two for-profit companies in Hong Kong… Codeberg is soft forking it because the now Gitea shareholders / trademark owners made it clear they want to maximize profits.

    If you care about promoting a democratic platform for everyone, do not use sourcehut. They will charge later on; their current free model enables both gathering users (potential clients) and making you a free tester/qa for them. I believe “financial aid” is undemocratic; free should be default. If anything, it should just require commercial, for-profit entities to pay; because then by default there is no processual need for “financial aid”. We should not trust any for-profit, commercial organization anyway for such important services/platforms (version control system hosting is crucial).

    From the beta onwards, unpaid accounts will be limited to read-only access to their own projects. Affected users will be emailed at least 60 days in advance of the transition. Users who host their own instance of Sourcehut, on their own servers, will be unaffected by this. Additionally, financial aid will be provided to those who cannot pay; no one is going to be priced out.

    —https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/

    • poVoq@slrpnk.net
      1·
      2 years ago

      I think you are doing sourcehut injustice as it is pretty much a “one guy” run service trying to make it an income generating job for himself. Asking for subscriptions is not unethical in that regard and you pretty much get what you pay for in that case.

      Personally I don’t like sourcehut much because it relies too much on email and selfhosting it is a mess (but it is all FOSS) so I would not recommend using it, but overall it is not a bad service.

      • hfkldjbuq@beehaw.org
        1·
        2 years ago

        He generating a job for himself is not what I criticize. I criticize promoting an undemocratic service for something so crucial that needs to be democratic which includes free service by default (otherwise you do not stand a chance against moving people out of GitHub and the like). I would never recommend to people in general a commercial and thus undemocratic service for key development (vcs).

        And did it occur to you it is a “one guy” show probably because he wants it that way? That is prone to authoritarianism, and prone that sourcehut maintainer to make it a very profitable business just like GitLab and now Gitea unless founding a proper non-profit organization? A blog post about not being driven by profit is not enough; make it a proper non-profit registered organization.

        In any case OP explicitly asked for a free service (which sourcehut in the future won’t be).

        • poVoq@slrpnk.net
          1·
          2 years ago

          You are making it sound like a “non-profit” is a magical solution to running a service. All it does it adding some tax regulations and making it difficult for non-worker owners to extract rent profits. Most “non-profits” are controlled by a few people that thus can decide their own salaries and make a profit any ways.

          And there is no such thing as a “free” service. Someone needs to pay for the infrastructure and operating costs one way or the other. It is just a question of how direct that payment is and if it is affordable by poorer people.

          • hfkldjbuq@beehaw.org
            1·
            2 years ago

            We have Codeberg. So there is no need in recommending sourcehut if the priority is promoting democratic services.

    • Johnny Mojo@lemmy.ml
      1·
      2 years ago

      You can get a public ip address for it if you want to share/collaborate using noip or similar service and a few minutes setting up your router.

  • cult@lemmy.ml
    1·
    2 years ago

    What’s wrong with GitLab? Definitely the most mature alternative.

    If you’re really interested in something that will not go down or get discontinued anytime soon, I’d also suggest taking a look at Radicle which is P2P and free

    • Tiuku@sopuli.xyz
      1·
      2 years ago

      I believe that their open-core business model is the biggest con. New features aren’t guaranteed to land on the free version.

    • musicmatze@lemmy.ml
      1·
      2 years ago

      GitLab was known to be a resource hog not too long ago. I cannot comment on its current state, as I don’t use it, but someone I know has to maintain an instance with a few developers and they have a cronjob to kill the system and reboot it every once in a while because GitLab eats the system if not restarted every once in a while…

    • Icarus@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      something to use, also this is an old post lol 🙃. I eventually settled on codeberg but I’m open to suggestions