Follow

Do you really care about ? But is your on a free platform?

Please move away from , .com, on to , , , and other diverse forges. Thank you! 💙

@codeberg What's the difference between #GitLab.com and the community edition? (This is why a lot of people use GitLab.com such as @derek and Eric S Raymond btw)

@james
The hosted service at gitlab dot com does not run the Community Edition, but rather a custom subset of the proprietary enterprise edition. Also, it uses e.g. , another proprietary platform.

For more backgrounds on the company itself, I only have git.sdf.org/humanacollaborator at hand ad-hoc. Not sure if it helps.
@derek

@codeberg
A great way we avoid accidentally boosting Cloudflare (and other #dotCon structures like GAFAM) is to have the @MitiGator to follow us. Just subscribe to it and it helps alot!! Its FOSS too! So you could run your own.

You'll need to go into the settings to toggle warnings for GAFAM). DM mitigator with the word 'set' and you get access to a basic page to set your prefs.

You'll thank us, later :-)
@james @derek

@codeberg
I know Cloudflare is annoying and bad for privacy (keeps cache of everything), but is it proprietary? I found this post from their blog:
blog.cloudflare.com/open-sourc
I couldn't find anything about Cloudflare on fsf.org. (Maybe someone else can?) They sure would've been interested in writing about them if it was proprietary.

As far as I know GitLab.com's free version runs CE. Unless a license key file is uploaded it doesn't run EE. about.gitlab.com/pricing/
@james @derek

@adnan360
We can't fully answer this, but we've once taken down leaked, proprietary Cloudflare code from our platform, and their blog article only says which free components they use, not that all they develop and deploy is free.

About GitLab, the flagship instance is of course equipped with the EE version and some features are limited if you don't pay for it. The code it runs is still nonfree obviously, and IIRC some features do differ a little, but I don't have proof at hand currently.
@james @derek

@codeberg
> The code it runs is still nonfree obviously…I don't have proof at hand currently.
If this is the case, it should be easy to detect. By just comparing with GitLab CE features/code. (Or maybe I missed something?) Do you mean the difference is in the backend and cannot be seen on frontend? If this is true and there is proof, this should be talked about more.

@james @derek

@codeberg
Their pricing page FAQ says uploading a license key "allows" EE to run: about.gitlab.com/pricing/#how-

gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab says:
> To use EE and get official support please become a subscriber.

As far as understand if users did not pay and uploaded a key file, they should be on CE.
@james @derek

@adnan360 @derek @james @codeberg gitlab.com paid subscriptions offer EE features, so they're running EE.

But then again, there isn't really a CE distribution. There is one repo, where a certain directory is not open source. If you don't buy the proprietary license that code will not be used. There is only one installer. GitLab is fuzzier than it used to be.

about.gitlab.com/handbook/mark…

@clacke @codeberg @adnan360 I just realized that since GitLab.com the service is proprietary, you don’t know whether or not they’re using CE or EE.

@james @codeberg @adnan360 That's true, you can't really know what they're running behind the scenes, so you can't know how good the situation is.

You can know how bad the situation is. Since they're offering non-core features you know it wouldn't be possible to provide the same service as theirs without using or reimplementing their proprietary code.
If you're only using core features, the philosophical and ideological question is: is it ethical to use their hosting as you could replicate them by self-hosting, or do you have objections such as the moral hazard that it's easy to enable non-free features, you're adding network effect to their hosting which has this moral hazard, you're providing legitimacy to their hosting, etc.

@codeberg @adnan360 @james

@clacke
This is a bad decision that GitLab took. For example, even if framagit.org wanted to run only the open portion, without proprietary code, they'd still have to keep the proprietary codes there? Even if they don't run?

There should be a libre fork of GitLab software without those proprietary parts. It's a mess.

@codeberg @james

@clacke @codeberg @adnan360 GitLabium, like Chromium and VSCodium. That being said, is there anything we need to remove from the Community Edition?

@clacke @adnan360 At the end of the day, while GitLab CE is open source, I still believe running #Gitea is more efficient than GitLab CE, and @codeberg is one of those instances.

@james For sure. Less of a kitchen sink, clear boundaries against the proprietary world. Gitea is great.

@codeberg @adnan360

@james
Agree. I use notabug.org and codeberg for most projects.

One of the reasons I use GitLab.com for one of my projects is the Pages. When I moved away from GH there was no other alternative for Pages, didn't know of framagit.org. Codeberg didn't have Pages back then. Now moving again to a different service would mean changing urls everywhere. And the CB CI is fairly new and under testing, not ideal still.
@clacke @codeberg

@james
One of the reasons I say not still ideal is because of:
codeberg.org/Codeberg/pages-se

Right now if I want to keep the output on a separate branch, I'd have to set the pages branch as default. The project might be beginner friendly, and having pages as the default branch would be weird to new users and would need further explanation somewhere.

But I'm hoping things will get better. I'm already thinking of moving one of my Pages projects (or at least mirroring) to Codeberg.
@clacke @codeberg

@james
Yes. They kept CE and EE in the same project creating this mess.

As @clacke said earlier:
> …there isn't really a CE distribution. There is one repo, where a certain directory is not open source. If you don't buy the proprietary license that code will not be used. There is only one installer. GitLab is fuzzier than it used to be.

Something tells me, this cleaning process can be automated. If this is the case, a libre version should definitely exist.

@codeberg

@hacknorris It's one of many alternatives. Feel free to check it out if it suits you. But as far as we know, Codeberg's community maintenance is unique so far.

@codeberg yea... one time i almost edited docs by myself :'D was close

@codeberg
yup, i also wish the place for discussions related to Floss projects would be on libre spaces. not the dammit discord for example

@tykayn All the Discord, Twitter, Facebook etc addiction to stay in touch with projects is a nightmare ...

@codeberg What about the rebels that don't use Git, or Mercurial? 😆

@vanitasvitae @codeberg I absolutely mean me, who, if you plug the right subdomains in, has self-hosted systems for.. Git, mercurial, bitkeeper, darcs, fossil, monotone, bazaar, CVS, and Subversion.

Why? Science isn't about why. It's about why not.

@tek_dmn @codeberg pijul all the way, can't wait for Gitea or Codeberg to support it.

@jakimfett @codeberg last time I tried to look at pijul, all I got were Rust compilation errors. I probably need to look again sometime.

@tek_dmn @codeberg it's tricky to get up and running, in part because they made the regrettable choice of requiring people to bootstrap via pijul to get the latest source code.

And there's still enough rough edges that it's not a full replacement for the git ecosystem.

It's close, tho. And far and away more simple to use once you shift over to the mindset. Git commands appear clumsy and obfuscated after using pijul for a while.

I still encounter places where it doesn't quite work as desired. Those have been getting fewer and further between tho.

@owzim We have in testing, you can apply for early access at codeberg.org/Codeberg-CI/reque.

Integrating self-hosted CI services is easily possible.

@codeberg cgit ftw (totally didnt spend 2 hours customizing my instance)

@codeberg well, I do like the idea of moving to an open hosting service but is there any easy way I can migrate the ~50 repos I have on these closed source platforms

@akionsight @codeberg 50 times a couple of clicks is not completely ridiculous:

docs.codeberg.org/advanced/mig…

But depending on your existing hosting services there might be scripts out there that could help automate it as well. Everything involved has APIs.

@clacke @codeberg hmm, that does not seem like a terrible idea, I will look into it

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!