First, they restricted code search without logging in so I’m using sourcegraph But now, I cant even view discussions or wiki without logging in.
It was a nice run
I just checked, and unless I’m missing something, you’re wrong? Tried https://github.com/snowplow/snowplow/wiki in private browser mode. Seems to work fine… Discussions work too.
And the restricted code search is not a big deal. You can still see and download all the source code you want and search that way. What usecase do you have for code searching without login? Lemmy is restricted too without login (as well as literally everything). The funny thing is that the last person I saw make a huge deal of this on Lemmy/Reddit, didn’t have a huge number of github commits over the years (they definitely had some, so they were active though, but even our newbies at work overtook them in months)
Creating a login is free too, and so is downloading source code. Github is a FREE service lol… And you’re whinging you need to create a free login? If you don’t like Github, then don’t use it lol. Absolutely nothing is preventing anyone migrating lol
Lemmy is restricted too without login (as well as literally everything)
You mean that you cannot comment or vote without an account? That just makes sense, because you need an account to tell the server to save some data of yours. That has to be connected to an account. Search does not (unless you are fixated on saving all actions of the user on the platform for behavioral analysis)
The funny thing is that the last person I saw make a huge deal of this on Lemmy/Reddit, didn’t have a huge number of github commits over the years (they definitely had some, so they were active though, but even our newbies at work overtook them in months)
Maybe you didn’t know, but not everyone in IT (job or hobby) writes code.
Creating a login is free too
Not really: you have to give personal information.
It’s not much of a problem until they only need an email address and are not too opinionated on your provider, but it’s not rare at all that platforms also require a phone number (either upfront at registration, or discord-microsoft-style, locking you out of your account untill you give it them) which for the most part won’t be private at all. Thus, you are paying with your data. For something (repo content) that the maintainers wanted to be public and free.Creating a login is free too, and so is downloading source code
What about the Wiki and Discussions? Several others said things that make me think it’s under A/B testing.
I moved all my open source projects to Gitlab the day Microsoft announced they were acquiring Github.
(I wish in retrospect I’d taken the time to research and decide on the right host. I likely would have gone to Codeberg instead of Gitlab had I done so. But Gitlab’s still better than Github. And I don’t really know for sure that Codeberg was even around back when Microsoft acquired Github.)
Codeberg us really new, i think like 2 years. Since covid for sure.
Ah. Good to know. I don’t feel so bad about going with Gitlab now.
I registered there june 2020 so longer than that
My first impression of gitlab was offputting because I was using hardened firefox and couldnt get past through cloudflare so I ended up using github. It was also better ui wise but now its just a mess
Edit: slowly i’m starting to move everything to codeberg
I’m OOTL. Why is Codeberg better than GitLab?
Codeberg is ran by a German nonprofit. GitLab is publically-traded on NASDAQ.
- It is FOSS while GitLab EE is not.
- It supports a lot of atifact repository formats while GitLab only docker registry.
- It is a non-commercial project.
- It supports a lot of atifact repository formats while GitLab only docker registry.
not true https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/packages/package_registry/supported_package_managers.html
that said, I hate gitlab and their commercial choices, they must die
Thank you I missed when they added this. I only track a very old FR for rpm support and was sure that situation is similar with other repos. However gitea/forgejo supports more formats including rpm.
I’m not really sure it is. I just wish I’d shopped around before jumping to Gitlab, really.
It kindof feels like Gitlab’s aims are more commercial and Codeberg’s are more in line with the FOSS movement, but that’s just a vague sense I have based on things I’ve seen but no longer remember specifically.
CalcProgrammer1’s response to my post seems pretty informative and apropos, though.
The landscape is changing so fast thanks to LLMs, everything is becoming gated behind logins. Thanks ChatGPT.
Make the move from Gitlab to Codeberg in the last few days: really simple to do, give it a try ;-)
Yeah, good thought. The only reason I haven’t is just because I worry that moving constantly might deter people from using any of my FOSS projects. Just seems like it could be considered a red flag (a sign of a “bad” or poorly-managed project) to some. (And… well… given that I didn’t do the research when I moved those projects, it wouldn’t be an entirely inaccurate conclusion to draw.)
Oh, I guess also I’d need to log back into my Github and change everything that says “moved to Gitlab” to say “moved to Codeberg” and update links. (I literally force-pushed to overwrite the entire history of my Github projects with a single commit each with just a README that says it moved to Gitlab with a link.)
Plus, if I really looked into it, I might decide I’d prefer to self-host on something like Gitea.
I guess all that to say I’d definitely want to put more thought into it before migrating any particular place a second time. Doing the actual move is indeed the easy part, but there’s a lot of thought and research to do before that. And a lot of meta-considerations to take into account.
Sounds like you like Codeberg, though. Just out of curiosity, what sold you on Codeberg?
Sounds like you like Codeberg, though. Just out of curiosity, what sold you on Codeberg?
Basically the fact that they are in Europe and for now they are free (even if I am planning to contribute some euros) and without all the “every site need to be a social network” facade (like Github).
All the features I need are present and I were not using the missing one anyway (like the CI). And I like to support an EU company ;-)Additionally it is a couple of years that I am trying to move away from US companies for every service I use, the move from Gitlab to Codeberg is the last one and came natural.
I still left my old and unmaintained projects on GitHub but I moved all my active projects to GitLab and any new projects go there too. I have them auto mirrored back to GitHub though as the more mirrors the better. I also recently set up a Codeberg mirror for some of my projects, though GitLab’s CI is what is keeping me on GitLab even though they nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back. Still hate them for that and if Codeberg gets a solid CI option, leaving GitLab would make me happy. They too have seen quite a lot of enshittification in the years since Microsoft bought GitHub.
nerfed the shit out of it and made it basically a requirement to host your own runners even for FOSS projects a year or two back.
Did they just reduce quotas (minutes?, cache storage?) or did they remove features? I’ve always used self-hosted runner
Drastically nerfed the quotas. FOSS projects with a valid license used to have GitLab Premium access to shared runners and now even FOSS projects with a valid license get a rather useless 400 minutes. They also require new accounts to add CC info just to use that paltry sum which means FOSS projects can’t rely on CI passing on forks to ensure a merge request passes the checks before merging, as even if you have project specific runners set up forks don’t use them and neither to MRs.
I wish companies didn’t offer what they can’t support from the beginning rather than this embrace, extend, extinguish shit. I guess in GitLab’s case there was no extend, it was just embrace FOSS projects and let them set up CI pipelines and get projects depending on the shared CI runners as part of merge request workflow for a few years and then extinguish by yoinking that access away and fucking over everyone’s workflow, leaving us scrambling to set up project side runners and ruining checks on MRs.
They also require new accounts to add CC
just FYI you can still register w/o a cc but the option is hidden, only reachable via ‘sign in’ and then ‘register’: https://gitlab.com/users/sign_up
that said they’re shit and need to die
What about the time they fired their artists and then immediately wrote a blog post congratulating themselves for making AI art from a model trained on the ex-employees’ art. Inspiring.
GitHub has art?
Aaw cute little logo character thingie.
It could be much worse.
Yeah… It could be… OP could have checked their facts for starters
Not sure how they got so many votes. i literally just tested Discussions and wiki in private browsing mode on a few repos and they work.
Because after placing code search through the login wall, and everything that is copilot it can really be expected that something like this happens. That you don’t see it does not tell much, as companies large like this are making good use of A/B testing.
There was also a partial outage 2 days ago. So That they did see it that day doesn’t say much either.
The reality is, hosting your own repo is a pain, and developers are looking for stability. It’s also not cheap to host source code, and Microsoft are doing it for free for open source projects
They also need to handle dodgy usage of the hosting too (which they’ve successfully been doing).
And again, if op wants to migrate, that’s up to them. I don’t care about code search though for people who aren’t logged in so I wouldn’t move, especially since if they don’t have a login, they’re not contributing anything anyway
I used to host code on source forge 20 years ago using CVS, and they were free but wouldn’t even let you delete any code you uploaded.
Sorry, but I don’t see your points.
I don’t see what you mean by that outage.
Then stability does not need locking read-only features behind a requirement to log in.
Microsoft has chosen to host public source code for free (or for their benefit which does not have monetary costs to users), no one forced them to acquire GitHub.
Defending against dodgy usage and moderating repos also don’t require read-only features to be login walled: if you don’t log in, you already couldn’t do anything that would need moderation.And again, if op wants to migrate, that’s up to them.
The post was not about them migrating their projects. It is raising awareness about an unwelcome change that affects them and probably others too. It bothers me too if Microsoft (or anyone else) wants to force me to log in for read-only access to content that was uploaded on their platform to be made public, because to me that means Microsoft wants to meddle with my data, including knowing what projects I’ve stumbled upon, but possibly even through absurd registration (or account kepping) rules like handing out a stable personal identifier like a phone number or an email address at a select few email providers.
I don’t care about code search though for people who aren’t logged in so I wouldn’t move,
I read this as “it’s not me, so I couldn’t care less”. I would bet you also find absolutely no problem with using google services (or those of any other data mining companies) and making others do that too.
especially since if they don’t have a login, they’re not contributing anything anyway
Oh, that’s not just about that. I have an account, but I don’t want Microsoft to tie every little search to my account for behavioral analysis.
This move is very much like public transport requiring the use of such bus passes that need to be scanned when you hop on, and which is tied to your person. They shouldn’t need to do that for verifying if I’m eligible for the service, but they are doing it anyway, for whatever unknown reason.But also, do you remember that GitHub also hosts tons of projects which are licensed to not only those who contribute?
I’m actually growing increasingly suspicious that you personally haven’t actually tested OP’s claims… Have you? Or am I literally the only one in this thread who tested anything lol
There’s literally no actual evidence what they’re saying is true, and you’re making assumptions that its an A/B test. We don’t even know what projects they tested (for all we know, they tested a project where the wiki was restricted to the team only, and assumed it affected everyone)
Either that or OP is just simply wrong, or, was affected by the outage that conveniently happened the day OP posted this, which specifically mentioned things including pages… You can see outages on https://www.githubstatus.com/history . You’re assuming again it shouldn’t affect other things…
They didn’t even post any information on what repos they tested. We see these crazy witch-hunts constantly in the tech community. Remember the Xbox ring of death debacle where people told others that Microsoft was stupid and left a piece of paper in their heatsinks? Turned out it was a thermal pad.
What data do you think Microsoft gains from “datamining” searches in repos?
Also, there are huge open source projects on Github, and if the searching thing was a big deal at all, they would be making public announcements… They aren’t. And again, the people making a deal out of it I’ve looked up, haven’t contributed much either (so, it feels like they simply are using it to attack Microsoft).
I just tested 3 other repos and they all have wiki’s and such working publicly. Given op is the only one I’ve seen complain about this anywhere and hasn’t posted any evidence, I think its just a weird witch hunt… Either that, or it could even be done in a specific country for legal reasons too… But there is no way of even testing that because we don’t know where OP is (they didn’t say that). Or it could be done to reduce server load
I sure as hell don’t agree with Copilot scraping repos, but there is no actual evidence in this discussion thread, only a claim by OP
Not sure how they got so many votes.
Social media loves a good roasting.
Social
Yeah. The funny thing is that the other guy who made a HUGE deal about the search thing and how it was bad for open source didn’t even have many commits over the years
Be it will?
Honestly for selfhosters, I can’t recommend enough setting up an instance of Gitea. You’ll be very happy hosting your code and such there, then just replicate it to github or something if you want it on the big platforms.
+1 for Gitea. It’s super lightweight, and works really well! I recently switched to Gitlab simply because I wanted experience with hosting it, but Gitea is much lighter and easier to use.
Forgejo please. Gitea was acquired by a for-profit company
I had no idea what Forgejo was and assumed you were calling me a derogatory term 😂 thanks though, I’ll look into Forgejo next time I need to switch Git platforms
Maybe have a look at this comment elsewhere in the thread.
Forgejo for you chap.
Honestly I’m kind of surprised that Gitea is still being recommended on Lemmy, it’s been a while since Gitea was acquired and the community has been raging since. Lemmy is regressing
Lemmy is regressing
it is not lol, you are just realising that you are not part of any elite for the simple reason of using it
Does it have any features that github doesn’t?
Its pretty good, for most people there isn’t anything missing
Actions can’t be triggered by workflow dispatch
Pull requests can’t wait for status checks
Just so you’re aware, Gitea was taken over by a for-profit company. Which is why it was forked and Forgejo was formed. If you don’t use Github as a matter of principle, then you should switch to Forgejo instead.
did they get federation working?
Nothing usable yet unfortunately, but they seem to be making good progress: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/59
Thanks for the link! As long as it’s being worked on I feel comfortable spinning up an instance. I’ve been meaning to do gitea for a while so I’m glad I waited.
Damnit of course it was. Thanks for letting me know, now I’ll have to redo my 100+ repos.
My understanding is the fork isn’t doing much but waiting to see if gitea turns to shit, pushing all their changes upstream. If you use docker I’ve heard you can just pull the new image and it simply drops in, no migration needed.
Changing the remote should be fairly trivial with enough bash skills
It’s more I don’t have them all checked out, and a good chunk are mirrors of github, so I’ll have to list out each one and push to a new remote, mirrors will have to be setup again, and I also use the container and package registries. I’m pretty embedded. It’s not impossible, but it’s a weekend project for sure.
If it was just forked, cant you just switch the package/container-image and be done?
Depends on how much it was changed I’m guessing. Fingers crossed I could just flip it over, but who knows
If you are using containers, it should be fairly trivial. Otherwise, there might be some renaming to do, but Forgejo should be 100% compatible with Gitea (at least right now). Just make sure you have a good backup in case anything would happen.
Simply changing the binary worked for me. Been more than 1 month and no migration issues.
It does still show gitea branding, however.
If there’s a fork, it’ll probably be an easy migration/in-place upgrade.
Oh man, thanks for this. I had no idea, having used gitea for years now.
Thanks for the info
They also broke some stuff with some javascript, I think. I’m using KDE’s web browser (Falkon) and it used to work well.
I’m honestly blown away by whomever finds this surprising. This is Microsoft we’re talking about. Everything they touch turns into this. Taking what is not theirs, using it for profit, and not even giving credit where credit is due.
The final strawberry for me was forcing people to have 2fa.
Why? That’s a good thing.
You don’t need the question mark. If something is for-profit (or can be used for profit) then sooner or later it will be enshittified.
They have teams of people whose entire job is figuring out ways to wring a few more cents from somebody. Put them at the helm of a company that’s stood for 1000 years and they’ll be thrilled at how easy it will be to use that name to sell plastic dogshit at a premium price.
No. I am able to decide for myself, whether or not I need 2FA. A code via E-Mail is enough for me. If you feel like you need 2FA; feel free to enable it for yourself…
Not sure how a company can turn a public digital key or a mathematically calculated number (both of them completely unlinked to your real identity in any way) to profit. But you do you I guess.
Well, I never said that. It just generally shows the direction, they are heading. They are literally FORCING you to enable that. I am not a baby. I don’t need a babysitter.
A code via E-Mail is enough for me.
Which basically is another type of 2FA…
At least this one isn’t utter bullshit
You are right. It is much worse, but hey, who am I to say to you how to protect your data ?
Eh? That was the final straw?
The writing was on the wall when they established a generative AI using everyone’s code and of course without asking anyone for permission.
It’s an interesting debate isn’t it? Does AI transform something free into something that’s not? Or does it simply study the code?
No, it’s exhausting.
There’s no debate. LLMs are plagiarism with extra steps. They take data (usually illegally) wholesale and then launder it.
A lot of people have been doing research into the ethics of these systems and that’s more or less what they found. The reason why they’re black boxes is precisely the reason we all suspected; they were made that way because if they weren’t we’d all see them for what they are.
Can you link it please? I’d like to inform myself.
I doubt they have a factual basis for their opinion, considering
they were made that way because if they weren’t we’d all see them for what they are.
Is just plain wrong. Researchers would love to have a non black box AI (i.e. a white box AI), but it’s unfortunately impossible with the current architecture.
Their use of language also feels more emotional and if anything it makes me more skeptical.
The reason they are blackboxes is because they are function approximators with billions of parameters. Theory has not caught up with practical results. This is why you tune hyperparameters (learning rate, number of layers, number of neurons ina layer, etc.) and have multiple iterations of training to get an approximation of the distribution of the inputs. Training is also sensitive to the order of inputs to the network. A network trained on the same training set but in a different order might converge to an entirely different function. This is why you train on the same inputs in random order over multiple episodes to hopefully average out such variations. They are blackboxes simply because you can’t yet prove theoretically the function it has approximated or converged to given the input.
The reason they’re black boxes is because that’s how LLMs work. Nothing new here, neural networks have been basically black boxes for a long time.
Sure, but nothing is theoretically stopping them from documenting every single data source input into the training module and then crediting it later.
For some reason they didn’t want to do that of course.
Llama and stability AI published their sources, did they not?
Ok
deleted by creator
You don’t need the question mark. If something is for-profit (or can be used for profit) then sooner or later it will be enshittified.
They have teams of people whose entire job is figuring out ways to wring a few more cents from somebody. Put them at the helm of a company that’s stood for 1000 years and they’ll be thrilled at how easy it will be to use that name to sell plastic dogshit at a premium price.
Compared to Gitlab, it definitely is shit already. And that has nothing to do with the artificial restrictions. God I hate this website. I appreciate their service, but the UI is genuinely trash.
What are good alternatives to GitHub except selfhosting? I only know gitlab.com. Anything else?
Sourcehut
I would say bitbucket except I don’t recommend bitbucket.
Codeberg is very good, and non-profit.
Thanks, I’ll take a look at it. And thanks to all the others. :D
SSH + an HTTP server can work if you are going barebones
Codeberg
The only thing surprising is that it took Microsoft almost three years to turn on the shit-spigot.
There’s nothing wrong with it honestly, and OP seems to be giving bad info… And trust me, I’m not a fan of Microsoft lol
i literally just tested Discussions and wiki in private browsing mode on a few repos and they work. Which just proves it’s not a big deal that needing a login isn’t an issue. Seems nobody actually upvoting doesn’t have a login
I heard other people complaining about what OP says, so I’m thinking maybe it’s A/B testing…
You gotta embrace first
Hold up, are you sure you can’t view Discussions or Wiki? Which sites can you not view them?
I’m fine viewing them for public repos that I usually visit.
Asking to make sure that Github is not slowly rolling out this lockdown.
Most probably. I was viewing discussions about podman, I could view them if directily opened from a link but it required login when navigated to linked pages and wiki
They also added some crappy requirements to their student benefit package.
Are you trying to get people to use it, or trying to get people to accidentally keep paying a subscription?
