It is kinda incorrect and kinda correct. Codeberg allows you to create private repositories. However, their rules are clear that the intent of private repositories must be in support of Free software projects: https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#how-about-pri..., which for many people is effectively not allowing private repositories.
I don't like how it reads differently based on perspectives, they should be crystal clear on what's allowed and what's not, but when they say '...unhappy about...' as a statement, it feels kinda amateur to me although I'm pretty sure the operators must be way capable than me lol.
Totally agreed. I get the feeling they have not yet had to draw too many lines in the sand... Yet. So they're probably keeping it flexible until they have to really start swinging the hammer.
This comes off as a please don’t make me tap the sign rule.
Imagine a food pantry that says please don’t come here if you make over 100k, but 100k + earners keep coming. Maybe they don’t enforce the rule, but your obviously showing disdain for basic rules
Forgejo is committed to using exclusively Free Software for it's own project development. Windows and Mac versions of the Forgejo Runner are built in the project's CI system as a minimal check to ensure platform compatibility, but due to the project's commitment, the project doesn't do integration testing on these platform. And therefore doesn't distribute untested software.
It hosts all the repositories backing applycreatures, we ran dozens of git projects on the same instance, have teams, you guys did a phenomenal work. I would say it's even easy to customise.
It probably depends on your scale, but I'd suggest self-hosting a Forgejo instance, if it's within your domain expertise to run a service like that. It's not hard to operate, it will be blazing fast, it provides most of the same capabilities, and you'll be in complete control over the costs and reliability.
A people have replied to you mentioning Codeberg, but that service is intended for Open Source projects, not private commercial work.
AFAIK because "act", the tool to run github actions locally, was there and there was no need to create something else. Also makes it easier for people to switch from github.
This will occur if you have a `forgejo-runner daemon` running while you try to use `exec` -- both are trying to open the cache database, and only the first to open it can operate. You could avoid this by changing the cache directory of the daemon by changing `cache.dir` in the config file, or run the two processes as different users.
> It's a bit strange there are two files IMHO.
The `.runner` file isn't a config file, it's a state file -- not intended for user editing. But yes, it's a bit odd.
The Forgejo project has been gently trying to redirect new contributors into fixing bugs before trying to jump into the project to implement big features (https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/337). This allows a new contributor to get into the community, get used to working with the codebase, do something of clear value... but for the project a lot of it is about establishing reputation.
Will the contributor respond to code-review feedback? Will they follow-up on work? Will they work within the code-of-conduct and learn the contributor guidelines? All great things to figure out on small bugs, rather than after the contributor has done significant feature work.
If you're running a public Forgejo instance and upgrading to v13, please take note of the post-release recommendation to run the `avatar-strip-exif` command to enhance user privacy.
If you're running a Forgejo instance and upgrading to v13 today (or soon), note the post-release recommendation to run the `avatar-strip-exif` command to enhance user privacy.
reply