7 ms·

I strongly disagree: I think this is a perfectly acceptable action. No project is entitled to host their project there, nor is any project compelled to do so, s

by kurante 2mo ago

I strongly disagree: I think this is a perfectly acceptable action. No project is entitled to host their project there, nor is any project compelled to do so, so I don't see why there is any harm in having this instance of Forgejo moderate itself as it sees fit. They have no moral requirement to support all kinds of software. If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code forge that better aligns with your beliefs. That is the beauty of free software!

hbbio 2mo ago
Another beauty of free software is they took the project from gitea and gogs before that.
matheusmoreira 2mo ago
> No project is entitled to host their project there So tiresome. This is going to lead to an even more fragmented free and open source ecosystem. GitHub is the default choice because it has huge network effects. Codeberg just opted out of those.
- krapp 2mo ago
  Good. That's how FOSS is supposed to work. Codeberg isn't competing against Github for market share, it serves a specific demographic with a specific ideology. Anyone is welcome to use any other host they want for their crypto and AI projects, with whatever policies align with their preferences. Or make your own with blackjack and hookers. There shouldn't even be "default choices" or "huge network effects" in FOSS anyway. That's just another form of centralization.
- kurante 2mo ago
  Did they, though? Do we have numbers on how many cryptocurrency projects were removed from Codeberg because of this, since GitHub is the default choice? Or are you suggesting that there is going to be a significant split because of this? I agree that this is probably going to cause some fragmentation, but I'm not convinced that it will do so in a meaningful matter or at the scale at which it is problematic to the free and open source ecosystem. For what it's worth, Forgejo is working on federation[1], which might address your networking effect concerns? [1]: https://forgejo.org/2026-05-monthly-report/#federation https://forgejo.org/2026-05-monthly-report/#federation
  - matheusmoreira 2mo ago
    > Or are you suggesting that there is going to be a significant split because of this? There are going to be many splits. Cryptocurrencies. Vibecoding. Whatever else offends them. Whether it will be "significant" or not, remains to be seen. I won't be sticking around to witness it.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  You know every project or collective used to have their own website and that was fine, right?
p-e-w 2mo ago
> If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code forge that better aligns with your beliefs. Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. The ban on “vibecoded” projects is effectively an invitation to start witch hunts. This is a terrible idea if you want to build a community.
- rvz 2mo ago
  > If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. So far it is now (unofficially) The hoster of Human-made™ non-crypto™ Free Software so far it is fully legal under the jurisdiction or country it resides in (Germany).
  - hparadiz 2mo ago
    That's a lie anyway. I know for a fact that major open source projects have AI contributions merged into main. At this point pretty much all the ones that take over 5 minutes to compile have some LLM generated code.
- kurante 2mo ago
  > Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. Well, they kinda do? Go on the main page, it's the second line of text: "Codeberg is a non-profit, community-led effort that provides services to free and open-source projects...". They're community-led, and this was a community decision. > If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them What do you want to see then? They've made a blog post about vibecoded with detailed explanations [1], a public banner mentioning they no longer allow cryptocurrency projects and restricting LLM content and with a link to the changelog with the differences in terms of use [2]. Should hackernews also mention that allowed content is dependent on its moderators with vaguely defined ideologies? [1]: https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-llms.html https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-... [2]: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/compare/17bdb39b0c1ecd0e423f3ba592650ce57fcdfbf5..71149c7fc95ccfeae36109b5cddca339e4aa1473?files=TermsOfUse.md#diff-d760d688bb9b929b62db808bfc76abe4493d095a https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/compare/17bdb39b0c1ecd0e42...
cush 2mo ago
It’s bad because it’s subjective. It’s a liability to host anything there now - their opinion of your product category could shift tomorrow… oh wait that already happened
- avaer 2mo ago
  Exactly. It's not so much that there are rules, it's that the rules are decided by random popularity vibes. It's not clear what vibes they will be smoking tomorrow. The least they could do as a nonprofit is make users aware that a core tenet of the service is to promote/ban whatever content the community voting decides any given day, and hopefully what ideology they are following. Otherwise any serious person would to well to stay away from Codeberg; you don't know if your project will be in the community's sights in the next vote.
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    Literally every rule is decided by random popularity vibes. Name one that isn't?
    - cush 2mo ago
      > Literally every rule… Imagine for a second if that were actually the case. Most rules are determined by physics, science, data, or something tangible. Food safety, aviation, electrical codes, even sports rules are based on math and statistics.
      - inigyou 2mo ago
        Not wanting to die of dysentry is a random popularity vibe. What if the people did yearn for the toilets?
        cush 2mo ago
        The only thing that's random here is your liberal interpretation of the word random
colordrops 2mo ago
You are arguing with a strawman. No one said anyone is entitled to host there. They are saying it's just a bad policy because it makes it an unreliable place to host projects when you don't know what will be banned next. You are "strongly disagreeing" with something other than what the OP said.
kleene_op 2mo ago
This sends a really bad signal. Why would I host my project there, taking the risk that they changed their mind overnight and declare my project inappropriate because of XYZ?
- selfhoster1312 2mo ago
  Noone is changing their mind overnight. These discussions on Codeberg have been going on for years, and you know, if only from reading HN, that a certain portion of humanity is strongly opposed to cryptocurrency and LLM slop. There's nothing surprising, new, or shocking about codeberg banning cryptocurrency projects. This is the logical conclusion of them being a non-profit acting for the good of humanity and not for the crypto grifters.
- Barrin92 2mo ago
  you shouldn't if that concerns you. Any organization or project that's value driven is going to turn people away who feel they run afoul of those values, that's the point. It's a non-profit, they don't gain anything from trying to serve everyone.

by kurante 2mo ago

hbbio 2mo ago

Another beauty of free software is they took the project from gitea and gogs before that.

matheusmoreira 2mo ago

> No project is entitled to host their project there So tiresome. This is going to lead to an even more fragmented free and open source ecosystem. GitHub is the default choice because it has huge network effects. Codeberg just opted out of those.

krapp 2mo ago
Good. That's how FOSS is supposed to work. Codeberg isn't competing against Github for market share, it serves a specific demographic with a specific ideology. Anyone is welcome to use any other host they want for their crypto and AI projects, with whatever policies align with their preferences. Or make your own with blackjack and hookers. There shouldn't even be "default choices" or "huge network effects" in FOSS anyway. That's just another form of centralization.
kurante 2mo ago
Did they, though? Do we have numbers on how many cryptocurrency projects were removed from Codeberg because of this, since GitHub is the default choice? Or are you suggesting that there is going to be a significant split because of this? I agree that this is probably going to cause some fragmentation, but I'm not convinced that it will do so in a meaningful matter or at the scale at which it is problematic to the free and open source ecosystem. For what it's worth, Forgejo is working on federation[1], which might address your networking effect concerns? [1]: https://forgejo.org/2026-05-monthly-report/#federation https://forgejo.org/2026-05-monthly-report/#federation
- matheusmoreira 2mo ago
  > Or are you suggesting that there is going to be a significant split because of this? There are going to be many splits. Cryptocurrencies. Vibecoding. Whatever else offends them. Whether it will be "significant" or not, remains to be seen. I won't be sticking around to witness it.
inigyou 2mo ago
You know every project or collective used to have their own website and that was fine, right?

p-e-w 2mo ago

> If you disagree with their beliefs, you are free to host your own instance or find a code forge that better aligns with your beliefs. Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. The ban on “vibecoded” projects is effectively an invitation to start witch hunts. This is a terrible idea if you want to build a community.

rvz 2mo ago
> If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. So far it is now (unofficially) The hoster of Human-made™ non-crypto™ Free Software so far it is fully legal under the jurisdiction or country it resides in (Germany).
- hparadiz 2mo ago
  That's a lie anyway. I know for a fact that major open source projects have AI contributions merged into main. At this point pretty much all the ones that take over 5 minutes to compile have some LLM generated code.
kurante 2mo ago
> Sure, but Codeberg has presented itself as a hoster for Free Software projects, not for Free Software projects that align with some vaguely defined ideology. If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them. Well, they kinda do? Go on the main page, it's the second line of text: "Codeberg is a non-profit, community-led effort that provides services to free and open-source projects...". They're community-led, and this was a community decision. > If they are now the latter, they should start by clearly stating that ideology so users can make an informed decision on whether Codeberg is the right place for them What do you want to see then? They've made a blog post about vibecoded with detailed explanations [1], a public banner mentioning they no longer allow cryptocurrency projects and restricting LLM content and with a link to the changelog with the differences in terms of use [2]. Should hackernews also mention that allowed content is dependent on its moderators with vaguely defined ideologies? [1]: https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-llms.html https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-... [2]: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/compare/17bdb39b0c1ecd0e423f3ba592650ce57fcdfbf5..71149c7fc95ccfeae36109b5cddca339e4aa1473?files=TermsOfUse.md#diff-d760d688bb9b929b62db808bfc76abe4493d095a https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/compare/17bdb39b0c1ecd0e42...

cush 2mo ago

It’s bad because it’s subjective. It’s a liability to host anything there now - their opinion of your product category could shift tomorrow… oh wait that already happened

avaer 2mo ago
Exactly. It's not so much that there are rules, it's that the rules are decided by random popularity vibes. It's not clear what vibes they will be smoking tomorrow. The least they could do as a nonprofit is make users aware that a core tenet of the service is to promote/ban whatever content the community voting decides any given day, and hopefully what ideology they are following. Otherwise any serious person would to well to stay away from Codeberg; you don't know if your project will be in the community's sights in the next vote.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  Literally every rule is decided by random popularity vibes. Name one that isn't?
  - cush 2mo ago
    > Literally every rule… Imagine for a second if that were actually the case. Most rules are determined by physics, science, data, or something tangible. Food safety, aviation, electrical codes, even sports rules are based on math and statistics.
    - inigyou 2mo ago
      Not wanting to die of dysentry is a random popularity vibe. What if the people did yearn for the toilets?
      - cush 2mo ago
        The only thing that's random here is your liberal interpretation of the word random

colordrops 2mo ago

You are arguing with a strawman. No one said anyone is entitled to host there. They are saying it's just a bad policy because it makes it an unreliable place to host projects when you don't know what will be banned next. You are "strongly disagreeing" with something other than what the OP said.

kleene_op 2mo ago

This sends a really bad signal. Why would I host my project there, taking the risk that they changed their mind overnight and declare my project inappropriate because of XYZ?

selfhoster1312 2mo ago
Noone is changing their mind overnight. These discussions on Codeberg have been going on for years, and you know, if only from reading HN, that a certain portion of humanity is strongly opposed to cryptocurrency and LLM slop. There's nothing surprising, new, or shocking about codeberg banning cryptocurrency projects. This is the logical conclusion of them being a non-profit acting for the good of humanity and not for the crypto grifters.
Barrin92 2mo ago
you shouldn't if that concerns you. Any organization or project that's value driven is going to turn people away who feel they run afoul of those values, that's the point. It's a non-profit, they don't gain anything from trying to serve everyone.