joencott

7 ms·

1.
by joencott 3y ago
> (i.e. the momentum you allude to[1]) The momentum stalled when the community was plagued recently by toxic behaviour of one of the members who started the fork. He had to step down from the "well-being" team[1], bullied a mod
2.
by joencott 3y ago
Not enough people are talking about this, as soon as the company took over they started to remove functionality. Shame on them.
3.
by joencott 3y ago
It is sad to see that the forgejo team accept and promote the built-in CI server. When the PR was first made they said they shouldn't trust the code, and will stick with woodpecker.
4.
by joencott 3y ago
Forgejo did relicense, there was a democratic vote and the it was agreed to finally relicense to a license that respects user's freedoms
5.
by joencott 3y ago
Forgejo is AGPL, there was just a vote and the community came out strongly to say they disagree with commercial usage of Forgejo! I am so happy they did that!
6.
First Forgejo Monthly Update(forgejo.org)
3 points by joencott 4y ago|0 comments
7.
A guide to potential liability pitfalls for people running a Mastodon instance(denise.dreamwidth.org)
5 points by joencott 4y ago|0 comments
8.
by joencott 4y ago
> developers working in any software to make a god damn living and not die starving in a gutter There are many examples of opensource developers receiving full time payment from the community. Krita, Godot, and more all exist long term.
9.
by joencott 4y ago
> Why should anyone care/use CI/CD software because Codeberg uses it? Woodpecker is community-run, and Codeberg is a non-profit running the biggest Gitea instance. > You speak negatively of Gitea, highlighting a fork because
10.
by joencott 4y ago
I am a fan of this fork, but not participating. SourceHut is relevant because the link is a reaction to what ddevault did for changing the SourceHut terms of service https://sourcehut.org/blog/2022-10-31-tos-update-cryp
11.
by joencott 4y ago
What does it sound like in your language?
12.
by joencott 4y ago
It was done by a democratic vote https://codeberg.org/forgejo/meta/issues/1#issuecomment-6885...
13.
by joencott 4y ago
A platform needs to be moderated, and I support Codeberg. Ddevault and SourceHut already banned all cryptocurrency-related projects.
14.
by joencott 4y ago
Forgejo is owned by an independent community instead of a for-profit company, and promises to be free/libre forever!
15.
by joencott 4y ago
It is easy to use, and Codeberg uses it for their public CI/CD
16.
by joencott 4y ago
This should not be trusted, the for-profit company worked on in secret on this for months with multiple people, and released it today in a code dump with no input from the community. Now they have no incentive to support alternative CI&#x2F
17.
by joencott 4y ago
You should try it, Codeberg uses it for their public CI/CD
18.
by joencott 4y ago
If only everyone follows ddevault's advice and starts each project with AGPL, that way no company can steal the code.
19.
by joencott 4y ago
Forgejo is a community-run fork because the project should not be owned by a for-profit company.
20.
by joencott 4y ago
The open letter gives all the details you need to know https://gitea-open-letter.coding.social/
21.
by joencott 4y ago
It's easy \ˈfor.d͡ʒe.jo\ the Esperanto word for forge
22.
by joencott 4y ago
Today the for-profit company released a code dump for the implementation of an integrated CI/CD server. This was worked on in secret for months by multiple people with no say from the community. Gitea should work with Woodpecker for cl
23.
Forgejo – Launching a Fork of Gitea(codeberg.org)
64 points by joencott 4y ago|78 comments