68
Let's Make Sure Github Doesn't Become the only Option (blog.edwardloveall.com)
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by biotin7@sopuli.xyz to c/opensource@programming.dev
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I was curious about your opinions (Not my article). Also this mentions Fossil & Pijul. Which are fully-fledged Git-Alternatives (Not just github)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Kissaki@programming.dev 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Alternative for github: codeberg.org

only for ~~public~~ FOSS

[-] biotin7@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

Why is that a bad thing ?

[-] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It is not a bad thing.

The comment claimed "alternative to GitHub". I pointed out that it's an alternative for only a subset of use cases/projects. Without that clarification, someone may explore or follow through and be disappointed.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Partially true, yes, that is a downside: codeberg currently does not allow non-free licenses. But no, a repository does not have to be public.

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2025
68 points (92.5% liked)

Opensource

4113 readers
126 users here now

A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!

CreditsIcon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

⠀

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
pylapp@programming.dev