6 ms·

OK, not GitHub "because Microsoft". But is there any particular reason why Forgejo and not GitLab, Gitea, or Gogs? I'm not throwing shade at Forgejo or anythin

by talles 1y ago

OK, not GitHub "because Microsoft". But is there any particular reason why Forgejo and not GitLab, Gitea, or Gogs? I'm not throwing shade at Forgejo or anything like that, I'm genuinely curious if there's anything about Forgejo that made it a better alternative than the other options.

nightpool 1y ago
Forejo is/was a soft fork of Gitea due to some licensing / trademark bruhaha that I think got blown somewhat out of proportion. (And Gitea was famous for using Github instead of dogfooding their own software, which I've always thought was a pretty strange choice). I'm not familiar enough with the development roadmap of both teams to make a good call on whether following the fork is a good idea or not, but I know a lot of projects are just bandwagoning on the fork due to generally frustrating Gitea governance. GitLab is open core and I know a lot of people are frustrated with their UX and with their high resource consumption for self-hosting (although I would expect YJIT probably made a big improvement here). I've only seen maybe one project use Gogs seriously, I don't get the sense that it has the same level of adoption as the other three.
- ksec 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - nightpool 1y ago
    The bit about the name seems to be a complete hallucination / tokenization error. The project's docs say: "Forgejo (pronounced /forˈd͡ʒe.jo/ (hear an audio sample)) is inspired by forĝejo, the Esperanto word for forge." I would expect the rest of the AI summary to be similarly unreliable / hallucinated—I compared the test directories for both projects and they both seemed to have about the same amount of activity.
    - ksec 1y ago
      Thank You for pointing this out. Although I am not entirely why my comment was downvoted into oblivion .
      - jraph 1y ago
        For all sorts of reasons, this will probably happen to the vast majority of LLM output copy-pastes here. It's a bit like copy pasting a search result link (anyone can do the search for themselves). LLM outputs don't provide the insight people are looking for on HN. They are unreliable. They sound boring. They may sound like ads for the LLM providers. There's probably someone out there actually knowing the thing and able to answer. There's usually a better way of finding out stuff. For instance, if you want to learn about Forgejo, going to its website or its Wikipedia page will be far more straightforward and reliable. You also stated that something that contains hallucinations is surprisingly decent, which can mislead people (who should strive to stay alert though). Many people also just plain dislike generative AI. You are not the first to whom it happens, and you'll probably not be the last. At that point, I believe HN's guidelines should be updated to discourage posting LLM outputs in most contexts.
- lotyrin 1y ago
  Yes, Issue with GitLab is their "Enterprise" maximalist feature set. Seems like they want to be the solution for the entire SDLC for every conceivable team. I remember thinking a decade ago "wow these guys are biting off a lot to chew, maybe in a decade they'll be able to tackle all these things in a comprehensive way" and my opinion now is they are still probably a decade out. I appreciate their ambition and wish them luck, but it's not for me. If if a project requires more maintenance than I could potentially do by myself in a pinch because of complexity or having a massive supply chain of dependencies that keep it on a treadmill I will hesitate to depend on it.
  - cyberpunk 1y ago
    A decade out? They do Code, Artifacts and CI basically that all works. What missing sdlc features are going to take them a decade to write?
    - lotyrin 1y ago
      It's not about features or if they work it's about the conceptual load presented to the user by the quality of how those features are integrated, how much configuration they require to do only what you want them to, ask of you only what you want them to, and no more. When I'm interacting with a maximalist system designed to be everything to everyone, I still only want to have to worry about the things I care about. They do seem to hold this as a value, but it's secondary to the maximalism.
    - MrJohz 1y ago
      In fairness, I've not used GL in a couple of years, but before that I used it a lot, and it all worked, but it never worked very well. Issue organisation was painful, and there was always some new trick that made it slightly easier but never enough (boards, nested workspaces, sprint tools, etc). CI had about a hundred different ways of doing the same thing, because every so often the GL devs would realise their current system wasn't quite general or powerful enough, and add a new way of defining DAGs, or a new way of sharing jobs, or a new way of managing environments. You didn't need to switch, but trying to figure out how all these different approaches interacted by reading the docs was a nightmare. In general, the documentation and UI were painful, and trying to figure out how to do something usually took me to a GL issue that would describe my problem but either be closed (with little indication of whether the feature was added or what form it had taken in the end), or open with no discussion apart from a bunch of comments from a community manager saying "a bronze supporter said that this is a blocker for them". Trying to figure out where features or configuration lived in the UI was also like pulling teeth, especially with GL's love of icons to explain what everything is. So it's not that the features are missing, it's that they're all half-baked, and it would take Gitlab another ten years to polish them off and round them out.
- ptman 1y ago
  There is a plan for hosting gitea on gitea: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029
  - account42 1y ago
    Yes but the project is almost a decade old. If they can't use it themselves by now why would anyone else.
rldjbpin 1y ago
> OK, not GitHub "because Microsoft". all well and good to host your own code. but from a contributer's point of view, it is between managing dedicated accounts per project you want to participate in...or sign in with github [1] openid exists, and is arguably older, but odds are most people would not be using it to begin with. [1] https://code.ffmpeg.org/user/sign_up https://code.ffmpeg.org/user/sign_up

by talles 1y ago

nightpool 1y ago

Forejo is/was a soft fork of Gitea due to some licensing / trademark bruhaha that I think got blown somewhat out of proportion. (And Gitea was famous for using Github instead of dogfooding their own software, which I've always thought was a pretty strange choice). I'm not familiar enough with the development roadmap of both teams to make a good call on whether following the fork is a good idea or not, but I know a lot of projects are just bandwagoning on the fork due to generally frustrating Gitea governance. GitLab is open core and I know a lot of people are frustrated with their UX and with their high resource consumption for self-hosting (although I would expect YJIT probably made a big improvement here). I've only seen maybe one project use Gogs seriously, I don't get the sense that it has the same level of adoption as the other three.

ksec 1y ago
[flagged]
- nightpool 1y ago
  The bit about the name seems to be a complete hallucination / tokenization error. The project's docs say: "Forgejo (pronounced /forˈd͡ʒe.jo/ (hear an audio sample)) is inspired by forĝejo, the Esperanto word for forge." I would expect the rest of the AI summary to be similarly unreliable / hallucinated—I compared the test directories for both projects and they both seemed to have about the same amount of activity.
  - ksec 1y ago
    Thank You for pointing this out. Although I am not entirely why my comment was downvoted into oblivion .
    - jraph 1y ago
      For all sorts of reasons, this will probably happen to the vast majority of LLM output copy-pastes here. It's a bit like copy pasting a search result link (anyone can do the search for themselves). LLM outputs don't provide the insight people are looking for on HN. They are unreliable. They sound boring. They may sound like ads for the LLM providers. There's probably someone out there actually knowing the thing and able to answer. There's usually a better way of finding out stuff. For instance, if you want to learn about Forgejo, going to its website or its Wikipedia page will be far more straightforward and reliable. You also stated that something that contains hallucinations is surprisingly decent, which can mislead people (who should strive to stay alert though). Many people also just plain dislike generative AI. You are not the first to whom it happens, and you'll probably not be the last. At that point, I believe HN's guidelines should be updated to discourage posting LLM outputs in most contexts.
lotyrin 1y ago
Yes, Issue with GitLab is their "Enterprise" maximalist feature set. Seems like they want to be the solution for the entire SDLC for every conceivable team. I remember thinking a decade ago "wow these guys are biting off a lot to chew, maybe in a decade they'll be able to tackle all these things in a comprehensive way" and my opinion now is they are still probably a decade out. I appreciate their ambition and wish them luck, but it's not for me. If if a project requires more maintenance than I could potentially do by myself in a pinch because of complexity or having a massive supply chain of dependencies that keep it on a treadmill I will hesitate to depend on it.
- cyberpunk 1y ago
  A decade out? They do Code, Artifacts and CI basically that all works. What missing sdlc features are going to take them a decade to write?
  - lotyrin 1y ago
    It's not about features or if they work it's about the conceptual load presented to the user by the quality of how those features are integrated, how much configuration they require to do only what you want them to, ask of you only what you want them to, and no more. When I'm interacting with a maximalist system designed to be everything to everyone, I still only want to have to worry about the things I care about. They do seem to hold this as a value, but it's secondary to the maximalism.
  - MrJohz 1y ago
    In fairness, I've not used GL in a couple of years, but before that I used it a lot, and it all worked, but it never worked very well. Issue organisation was painful, and there was always some new trick that made it slightly easier but never enough (boards, nested workspaces, sprint tools, etc). CI had about a hundred different ways of doing the same thing, because every so often the GL devs would realise their current system wasn't quite general or powerful enough, and add a new way of defining DAGs, or a new way of sharing jobs, or a new way of managing environments. You didn't need to switch, but trying to figure out how all these different approaches interacted by reading the docs was a nightmare. In general, the documentation and UI were painful, and trying to figure out how to do something usually took me to a GL issue that would describe my problem but either be closed (with little indication of whether the feature was added or what form it had taken in the end), or open with no discussion apart from a bunch of comments from a community manager saying "a bronze supporter said that this is a blocker for them". Trying to figure out where features or configuration lived in the UI was also like pulling teeth, especially with GL's love of icons to explain what everything is. So it's not that the features are missing, it's that they're all half-baked, and it would take Gitlab another ten years to polish them off and round them out.
ptman 1y ago
There is a plan for hosting gitea on gitea: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029
- account42 1y ago
  Yes but the project is almost a decade old. If they can't use it themselves by now why would anyone else.

rldjbpin 1y ago

> OK, not GitHub "because Microsoft". all well and good to host your own code. but from a contributer's point of view, it is between managing dedicated accounts per project you want to participate in...or sign in with github [1] openid exists, and is arguably older, but odds are most people would not be using it to begin with. [1] https://code.ffmpeg.org/user/sign_up https://code.ffmpeg.org/user/sign_up