7 ms·

> It's only a great alternative if you believe GitHub deserves to die Geez, why so extreme? They choose whom they support for free, and they choose FLOSS proje

> It's only a great alternative if you believe GitHub deserves to die Geez, why so extreme? They choose whom they support for free, and they choose FLOSS projects with similar goals/philosophies. If your project has a different philosophy, fine, up to you, but it's not something they want to spend their time to support for free. You are welcome to go somewhere else, including going to or staying at GitHub. Nobody wants anything "to die". It's about providing alternatives for people who are not entirely happy. If you are, fine, nobody forces you to anything. Just like you can't force the Codeberg people to provide something to you for free which they are not comfortable with.

jbergens 3y ago
If all they wanted was to be free only for OSS they could have made their priceplan that way. Now they basically forbids non-OSS.
- cxr 3y ago
  You could almost certainly pay to host non-open source projects on Codeberg. It happens to be that the price is unlisted, though (and it's probably higher than what you or anyone else would want to spend, anyway).
  - alephu5 3y ago
    I pay $20 a year to develop private projects on source hut with CI and everything else included.
    - cxr 3y ago
      I don't understand the purpose of this comment. It strikes me as a nonsequitur. How does it conform to the logical throughline of the previous two comments?
- haleudo 3y ago
  It is. FOSS is for free. Non-FOSS is $infinity. It's a very simple price plan.
timwaagh 3y ago
You ask 'why so extreme'. What mostly riles me up about some 'foss movement' people is the fact that some of them think they're morally superior. In cases like the poster I replied to it seemed obvious and I point out what his ethics actually mean in the end. Perhaps it will make him think.
- haleudo 3y ago
  > What mostly riles me up about some 'foss movement' people is the fact that some of them think they're morally superior. That may be so. I also don't like that. But the way to address that is not to be full of yourself yourself.
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  Honestly, it never works to get people to listen to what you have to say if you do it in a self-righteous, condescending, and abrasive manner. They just write you off as a jerk and it reinforces their belief that people who don't agree with them are unpleasant.

jbergens 3y ago

If all they wanted was to be free only for OSS they could have made their priceplan that way. Now they basically forbids non-OSS.

cxr 3y ago
You could almost certainly pay to host non-open source projects on Codeberg. It happens to be that the price is unlisted, though (and it's probably higher than what you or anyone else would want to spend, anyway).
- alephu5 3y ago
  I pay $20 a year to develop private projects on source hut with CI and everything else included.
  - cxr 3y ago
    I don't understand the purpose of this comment. It strikes me as a nonsequitur. How does it conform to the logical throughline of the previous two comments?
haleudo 3y ago
It is. FOSS is for free. Non-FOSS is $infinity. It's a very simple price plan.

timwaagh 3y ago

You ask 'why so extreme'. What mostly riles me up about some 'foss movement' people is the fact that some of them think they're morally superior. In cases like the poster I replied to it seemed obvious and I point out what his ethics actually mean in the end. Perhaps it will make him think.

haleudo 3y ago
> What mostly riles me up about some 'foss movement' people is the fact that some of them think they're morally superior. That may be so. I also don't like that. But the way to address that is not to be full of yourself yourself.
Eisenstein 3y ago
Honestly, it never works to get people to listen to what you have to say if you do it in a self-righteous, condescending, and abrasive manner. They just write you off as a jerk and it reinforces their belief that people who don't agree with them are unpleasant.