Forgejo instead of Gitea

[Rémi Rampin]

2024-12-20 15:28 UTC-05, fossdd <fossdd at pwned.life>:

> Disclaimer: I've worked with both projects, but i'm currently only
> involved with Forgejo (and Codeberg).
>
> And I have to say that Forgejo is IMO the community git software.
> Everyone is welcome to contribute, commiters are known members from the
> community, everyone is heard, etc, etc.
>
> My interaction with Gitea was rather bad. No reaction on PRs, constant
> features, bug and security-issues were ignored by the Gitea team (see
> also
>
> https://forgejo.org/2023-11-release-v1-20-5-1/#responsible-disclosure-to-gitea
> ).
>

That really comes across as an unwarranted target attack. You, a member of
Forgejo and Codeberg, asking for the other fork to be delisted. This goes
quite far beyond promoting your work or helping users.

Does Forgejo have the proprietary features of Gitea? If not, how does your
open-core definition not apply to Forgejo as well? You just renamed that
core, that does nothing for users. The main output from the Forgejo project
seems to be the constant bile you throw at the other version.

GitLab is also listed on GiveUpGitHub, with good reason. Is there any
argument why "open core" software shouldn't be in "open source"
recommendations?

Your claim of "copyright assignment" is also widely contested and does not
match my understanding. The substance of the matter seems to be that Gitea
uses (and has always used) "Copyright The Gitea Authors" in source files.
This does not "assign copyright" (who would it assign it to? No
organization is listed) and just appears to be a popular target for Forgejo
members to kick up a fuss on the Gitea tracker and other public spaces,
just like you are doing now by asking for it to be removed from a
third-party list where you know it belongs.


Your request strikes me as widely inappropriate for this space. Gitea is a
popular open-source alternative to GitHub. It is indisputable that some of
the alternatives listed will be better, or have larger communities, or be
more publicly developed, or more suited to specific purposes than others.
But asking for your competition to be removed because you disagree with
their project management is out of line.

Is that really what matters the most to you and Codeberg? Not that open
source projects move off of GitHub, but rather that the ones that move
don't go to your competitor?

-- 
Rémi Rampin
Self-hosted Gitea user, unaffiliated
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sfconservancy.org/pipermail/give-up-github/attachments/20241220/34f35196/attachment.html>