8 ms·

The amount of Codeberg FUD one can encounter on HN is unreal. I'm starting to question whether there's an organized effort behind it. Both personal and privat

by cxr 11d ago

The amount of Codeberg FUD one can encounter on HN is unreal. I'm starting to question whether there's an organized effort behind it. Both personal and private repos are explicitly permitted in the Codeberg TOS: > Private repositories[…] allowed for really small & personal stuff like your journal, config files, ideas or notes, but explicitly not as a personal cloud or media storage.

jasonvorhe 11d ago
As if there wasn't a massive amount of nuance between "you may keep your dotfiles private but don't upload your photo library". If their rules read this arbitrary, I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Assume you did some local LLM stuff in June that worked with a 200MB set of various jpegs and you wanted to keep it private: Is this still legit in September 2026? I wouldn't rely on it.
- embedding-shape 11d ago
  > , I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Yeah, I think this is a win-win for both parties. You strike me as someone who would "ride along the lines of the terms of service" basically, and you'll see anything not explicitly forbidden as being allowed essentially. While Codeberg is a project driven by humans, with human reactions to what's happening. If you're not comfortable with rules not being 100% defined, and requiring a humans value judgement to be had to figure out if the rule is broken or not, I don't think Codeberg is for you. The rest of us, who are OK with humans making decisions rather than just going by what's written in rules, are fine with this, because we know our private repositories won't be deleted. And if they are, you'll be able to speak with a human to explain, and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it. But if you try to argue about some "That wasn't explicitly stated", then yeah, they'll probably get tired of you quickly. Think your participating in your local user group vs some corporate/government forum, the rules will be enforced differently.
  - jeremyjh 11d ago
    > "ride along the terms of service" By using AI to write code, like virtually everyone does? Tell me, what indication was there in their TOS, that this might be close to a line?
    - embedding-shape 11d ago
      Do X in whatever way you want, if you do so knowing it's against the terms of service, you're "riding along the line of the terms of service" for sure if you try to explain away how it is/isn't explicitly forbidden.
      - jeremyjh 11d ago
        Using AI was not against any terms of service at all three months ago.
        embedding-shape 11d ago
        Ok, point being? Codeberg is a non-profit community that evolves and figures out where to move, all the time, this is the point of the association itself. Members discuss what to do, then a decision is made, then new rules eventually apply, this is how the project moves forward.
        jeremyjh 11d ago
        You said people were “riding the line”. They weren’t. Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting. Projects that were not illegal, indecent or dangerous. I can’t think of another time something like that has happened. They can do it, sure, but many had hoped they could be an independent host for all FOSS as GitHub deteriorates. They have disappointed those hopes, and we will have to look to others - like Codefloe - to carry that hope forward.
        xigoi 11d ago
jeremyjh 11d ago
> journal .. config file .. ideas or notes So, not code for personal projects? Right? A private git repo with my own code, is not permitted. More to the point of this thread - there is no specific affordance for a personal website.
- cxr 11d ago
  > So, not code for personal projects? Right? No, not right. Still wrong: "Use it for your personal notes, your side project or any other[sic] you want to keep private". (That's even ignoring that I was addressing the claim that you actually made, which is different from the one you're making now; you're moving the goalposts.)
  - jeremyjh 11d ago
    That language is not in the terms of service. The word "side" does not appear on that page. The terms of service state: > Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like storing secrets, team-internal discussions or hiding projects from the public until they're ready for usage and/or contribution. They are also allowed for really small & personal stuff like your journal, config files, ideas or notes, but explicitly not as a personal cloud or media storage. The TOS Section 1: > Our service is open for all projects covered by a licence for free and open source software, free and open source hardware, or free cultural works as defined by § 2 (1) 1. So the "FUD" I am spreading is literally the headline of the legal terms of service. There is an organization behind the spread of this information, and it is Codeberg e.V.
    - cxr 11d ago
      You have made two concrete claims about Codeberg that are verifiably untrue: "Codeberg does not permit personal repos" "A private git repo with my own code, is not permitted" Codeberg's policy explicitly permits personal repos, including private code repos. Both of your claims are false. There is no getting around this, no matter how much you try to move the goalposts or the other forms of conversational misdirection you're trying to pull off here.

by cxr 11d ago

jasonvorhe 11d ago

As if there wasn't a massive amount of nuance between "you may keep your dotfiles private but don't upload your photo library". If their rules read this arbitrary, I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Assume you did some local LLM stuff in June that worked with a 200MB set of various jpegs and you wanted to keep it private: Is this still legit in September 2026? I wouldn't rely on it.

embedding-shape 11d ago
> , I wouldn't trust them to host any of my stuff, especially considering that you always have to hope they don't change their rules any further. Yeah, I think this is a win-win for both parties. You strike me as someone who would "ride along the lines of the terms of service" basically, and you'll see anything not explicitly forbidden as being allowed essentially. While Codeberg is a project driven by humans, with human reactions to what's happening. If you're not comfortable with rules not being 100% defined, and requiring a humans value judgement to be had to figure out if the rule is broken or not, I don't think Codeberg is for you. The rest of us, who are OK with humans making decisions rather than just going by what's written in rules, are fine with this, because we know our private repositories won't be deleted. And if they are, you'll be able to speak with a human to explain, and if your intention is fine and good, they'll be OK with it. But if you try to argue about some "That wasn't explicitly stated", then yeah, they'll probably get tired of you quickly. Think your participating in your local user group vs some corporate/government forum, the rules will be enforced differently.
- jeremyjh 11d ago
  > "ride along the terms of service" By using AI to write code, like virtually everyone does? Tell me, what indication was there in their TOS, that this might be close to a line?
  - embedding-shape 11d ago
    Do X in whatever way you want, if you do so knowing it's against the terms of service, you're "riding along the line of the terms of service" for sure if you try to explain away how it is/isn't explicitly forbidden.
    - jeremyjh 11d ago
      Using AI was not against any terms of service at all three months ago.
      - embedding-shape 11d ago
        Ok, point being? Codeberg is a non-profit community that evolves and figures out where to move, all the time, this is the point of the association itself. Members discuss what to do, then a decision is made, then new rules eventually apply, this is how the project moves forward.
        jeremyjh 11d ago
        You said people were “riding the line”. They weren’t. Codeberg made up a rule that excluded eligibility for projects they were already hosting. Projects that were not illegal, indecent or dangerous. I can’t think of another time something like that has happened. They can do it, sure, but many had hoped they could be an independent host for all FOSS as GitHub deteriorates. They have disappointed those hopes, and we will have to look to others - like Codefloe - to carry that hope forward.
        xigoi 11d ago

jeremyjh 11d ago

> journal .. config file .. ideas or notes So, not code for personal projects? Right? A private git repo with my own code, is not permitted. More to the point of this thread - there is no specific affordance for a personal website.

cxr 11d ago
> So, not code for personal projects? Right? No, not right. Still wrong: "Use it for your personal notes, your side project or any other[sic] you want to keep private". (That's even ignoring that I was addressing the claim that you actually made, which is different from the one you're making now; you're moving the goalposts.)
- jeremyjh 11d ago
  That language is not in the terms of service. The word "side" does not appear on that page. The terms of service state: > Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like storing secrets, team-internal discussions or hiding projects from the public until they're ready for usage and/or contribution. They are also allowed for really small & personal stuff like your journal, config files, ideas or notes, but explicitly not as a personal cloud or media storage. The TOS Section 1: > Our service is open for all projects covered by a licence for free and open source software, free and open source hardware, or free cultural works as defined by § 2 (1) 1. So the "FUD" I am spreading is literally the headline of the legal terms of service. There is an organization behind the spread of this information, and it is Codeberg e.V.
  - cxr 11d ago
    You have made two concrete claims about Codeberg that are verifiably untrue: "Codeberg does not permit personal repos" "A private git repo with my own code, is not permitted" Codeberg's policy explicitly permits personal repos, including private code repos. Both of your claims are false. There is no getting around this, no matter how much you try to move the goalposts or the other forms of conversational misdirection you're trying to pull off here.