11 ms·

Here is a list of free Git hosting services for open source software: • https://github.com/ https://github.com/ • https://gitlab.com/ https://gitlab.com/ • h

Here is a list of free Git hosting services for open source software: • https://github.com/ https://github.com/ • https://gitlab.com/ https://gitlab.com/ • https://bitbucket.org/ https://bitbucket.org/ • https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/ (As per the linked article) • https://sr.ht/ https://sr.ht/ (Sourcehut) Codeberg and Sourcehut appear to use open source code for their web page backend; the others seem to use proprietary software (in the case of GitLab, there is a free version, but gitlab.com also uses non-free software). Sourcehut says they may some day charge people to host open source software on their server, but right now it’s a free beer service (but, yes, I have donated) using Free (libre) software. Souceforge also has a proprietary free-to-use for open source Git hosting service, but their service is a little buggy so I would use one (or in my case, all) of the five I have listed. If there are any others, please let us know. In terms of continuous integration, in my particular use case, the automated CI tests take about an hour to all run, so I have a Raspberry Pi server the size of a deck of cards which runs Ubuntu 22.04. The server uses a crontab which checks to see if the Git repo has been updated once a day, and runs the tests inside a Docker container if the repo has changed. Some problems, such as automated testing, don’t need to be solved by putting everything in a cloud.

beanaroo 4y ago
Also proprietary and relatively new on the scene: https://www.jetbrains.com/space/ https://www.jetbrains.com/space/
- ChristianGeek 4y ago
  Has anyone tried this yet? It looks promising, especially with JetBrains behind it.
psychoslave 4y ago
https://www.tuxfamily.org/ https://www.tuxfamily.org/
User23 4y ago
Let's not forget https://savannah.gnu.org/ https://savannah.gnu.org/.
throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
Github and Bitbucket will shut you down on a whim of twitter sharia police https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/c-plus-equality-c https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/c-plus-equality-c I suggest to use and support the alternative that explicitly promises not to engage in censorship - gitgud.io
slow_typist 4y ago
gitlab and github both provide a program that runs on your raspi and executes the ci pipeline. Search for ‘runner‘. As a solo developer, you can even install the runner on your laptop. It will only be needed while you’re connected to the network anyways.
hypnotortoise 4y ago
You forgot the most important one for the future https://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/
alexvoda 4y ago
Didn't Sourceforge open source their forge server software. IIRC it is an Apache project now.
severino 4y ago
Gitee (gitee.com) is also a free hosting service that can be used for OSS, afaik.
- bauruine 4y ago
  Which is a Chinese site hosted behind the GFW. I can't even access the site because they block my IP address. I really hope OSS projects don't consider them for their hosting.
  - severino 4y ago
    I guess it's the same stuff developers from other countries like Iran, Syria, etc., face when trying to work with Github. It's a shame many OSS projects find providers like these OK when there should be plenty of alternatives that don't block users by country.
- computerfriend 4y ago
  Subject to mandatory review by a censor before your code gets published. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gitee-chinas-answer-github-review-093000997.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gitee-chinas-answer-github-re...
- mistrial9 4y ago
  China-based
  - severino 4y ago
    I know, but not all of the alternatives noted by the parent post are hosted in Europe, either. Some are US based, and it doesn't mean your project can't be subject to censorship.
- RobotToaster 4y ago
  Fun fact, they're literally backed by the Chinese government who are trying to promote open source, I assume because it can't be embargoed. On the bright side I suppose that means they shouldn't have any of those pesky commercial pressures to start charging people. I don't think I need to say what the down sides are.
sva_ 4y ago
> gitlab Pretty sure GitLab is open source.
- ptman 4y ago
  Open core
- TAForObvReasons 4y ago
  GitLab is a nuanced situation. There is a FOSS GitLab https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss The hosted gitlab.com instance uses EE features so parent is correct to say that the gitlab.com site is not open source.
  - hk__2 4y ago
    > The hosted gitlab.com instance uses EE features so parent is correct to say that the gitlab.com site is not open source. It’s OSS but with proprietary parts. That’s the issue with the term "open-source": their source code is indeed open [1] but it’s not 100% free (as in freedom). Edit: mmh apparently I’m mistaken; according to another commenter this is called "open-core" and not "open-source" [2]. [1]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33237641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33237641
    - CameronNemo 4y ago
      Another term you might be looking for is "source available", meaning you can read the source code but not modify or distribute it without a license.
TAForObvReasons 4y ago
Codeberg source https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/gitea https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/gitea Codeberg is a fork of Gitea https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea which curiously uses GitHub for hosting.
- hk1337 4y ago
  Didn't even change the readme, it seems. *EDIT* https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/ I'm guessing they're just maintaining their own copy and Codeberg is more about the service rather than being another git hosting project.
jpe90 4y ago
I tried out self hosting on my $5/mo VPS and found it much easier than expected. https://jeskin.net/blog/self-hosting-git-with-stagit/ https://jeskin.net/blog/self-hosting-git-with-stagit/
- jcul 4y ago
  Stagit looks really nice and lightweight. I like the idea of generating static webpages, it sounds great for read only content. However, it doesn't sound very good for collaboration. Someone can come your repo but it doesn't seem easy for them to submit changes back upstream to your repo?
  - jpe90 4y ago
    The best way to collaborate would be just sending patches, either with git send-email or as an attachment to a regular message. Then the author applies them and the repo/stagit will display the change. https://git-send-email.io/ https://git-send-email.io/
- giobox 4y ago
  Can't you just run gitlab or whatever else out of a container in 5 seconds nowadays? Map a single volume and you are likely done. Its not that it's hard to self host that I choose to use third party git services (its clearly not!), it's just that the benefits of self hosting a git repository are increasingly few unless you have strict security requirements etc etc, and the free options are so good now. Running self hosted git is trivial in 2022 if you really need to, with many one-line container deployment options to choose from. > https://registry.hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ https://registry.hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ While it might be fun to self-host, a 5 dollar a month fee to run it is also not price competitive with the free or paid individual tiers at github.com for a single user too. I'd probably only do this if the git repo was being hosted on my home LAN. > https://github.com/pricing https://github.com/pricing
  - jpe90 4y ago
    Yeah I'm sure you could. I use that VPS for my blog and personal projects also so I wanted to keep resource utilization to a minimum and not administer a webapp.
capableweb 4y ago
Worth noting as well, from the list of various hosting services, Codeberg is the only one explicitly for FOSS software and not for proprietary software. Sourcehut seems to be in the box of everything for running the service is FOSS but they would be OK with hosting non-FOSS software, whereas Codeberg isn't for hosting proprietary software at all. From the FAQ (https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#is-it-allowed-to-host-non-free-software%3F https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#is-it-allowed...): > Is it allowed to host non-free software? > Our mission is to support the creation and development of Free Software; therefore we only allow repos licensed under an OSI/FSF-approved license. For more details see Licensing article. However, we sometimes tolerate repositories that aren't perfectly licensed and focus on spreading awareness on the topic of improper FLOSS licensing and its issues. > Can I host private (non-licensed) repositories? > Codeberg is intended for free and open source content. [...]
- knowledge-clay 4y ago
  There was a discussion on sourcehut about making this change to their TOS, not sure what happened with it though https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CC32T7UNXIK7O.3QD7A1EJDIGAQ%40homura%3E https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CC32T7UNXIK7O....
bee_rider 4y ago
I think we should emphasize that Sourcehut is just currently free while it is in alpha. Mr. DeVault been very upfront about the fact that he's planning to start charging eventually. From his FAQ, https://man.sr.ht/billing-faq.md#why-should-i-pay-when-github-gitlab-etc-are-free https://man.sr.ht/billing-faq.md#why-should-i-pay-when-githu... The point is to set up a responsible financial situation between himself and the users and avoid the bad incentive structures that "free" services have ("Free" until VC money runs out, at which point it is roll of the dice whether they'll be monetized through acquisition, or some annoying scheme).
- NeutralForest 4y ago
  The guy very SourceHut is very nice and dedicated to the project, his blog is also interesting to understand the philosophy being SourceHut.
- endgame 4y ago
  I've been paying for years, because I agree with these principles. It's a good service.
- _ktx2 4y ago
  Does SourceHut still have an aversion to Kubernetes and Docker? Last year I was trying to setup SourceHut on my home infra (which is Docker/SystemD based, but was Kubernetes based) and I was told I'd be banned if I asked about it, and that they don't support that kind of software. Super weird interaction from someone I otherwise used to admire.
  - dspillett 4y ago
    Some Kubernetes and Docker people get somewhat religious about it, and rather than taking “I/we don't support that and don't have any immediate plans to, but feel free to try it yourself” as a valid response will plead, nag, and otherwise try to cajole a project's maintainer's to reconsider, sometimes being irritatingly persistent and calling into question a person's overall intelligence because they don't currently want to directly support that plumbing. Such discussions can become time-consuming, tiresome, and (if really persistent in trying to convert them to the cause) difficult to just ignore. > be banned if I asked about it I assume this means the maintainer(s) have experienced the above a few times, and have given up trying to be more polite about it! Don't take it personally. If you want to use a tool with that plumbing then feel free to DIY. If you make it work well, perhaps publish your process and/or images and support it for others who need/want that support.
Blackthorn 4y ago
I no longer trust bitbucket after they shut down their mercurial support. That was the thing that differentiated them from everyone else. Why even use them now?
- NexRebular 4y ago
  I wonder if there even is public mercurial hosting available anymore. This git monoculture is starting to be a bit annoying.
  - Aeolun 4y ago
    For the longest time I just couldn’t see what the fuzz (about Git) was about. But after finally switching I don’t think I’d ever go back.
    - ColonelPhantom 4y ago
      What VCS were you coming from, and what makes Git so much nicer? I believe Git and Mercurial are considered to be 'about as good' by most.
  - gbear605 4y ago
    SourceHut offers mercurial hosting, though it’s entirely community maintained.
  - slondr 4y ago
    Sourcehut.
  - alwillis 4y ago
    Heptapod supports a Mercurial hosting service (free for OSS) that’s a fork of GitLab: https://heptapod.net/ https://heptapod.net/
    - Blackthorn 4y ago
      Really appreciate the link. Much prefer mercurial to git on my own stuff.
JanMa 4y ago
Keybase also has support for hosting Git repos: https://book.keybase.io/git https://book.keybase.io/git
- hk1337 4y ago
  I used to use Keybase for my dotfiles repo but I thought Keybase was on their way out since being bought?
  - jcul 4y ago
    Which is a shame, assuming it's true. I thought keybase was really innovative in their use of modern cryptography.
- mdaniel 4y ago
  I'd exercise caution building on top of it since I don't think Zoom cares about Keybase and I was unable to find any server among their repositories (https://github.com/orgs/keybase/repositories https://github.com/orgs/keybase/repositories) such that one could self-host after Zoom bores of running the Keybase infra
medoc 4y ago
There is also framagit: https://framagit.org/public/projects https://framagit.org/public/projects which is a Gitlab instance run by a French non-profit, Framasoft: https://framasoft.org/en/ https://framasoft.org/en/ I host my project there, no issues.
- jszymborski 4y ago
  I have a lot of love for framasoft, but beware that they have limited resources and have in the past closed down or geofenced services I was relying on. I think Codeberg's co-op style governance/funding makes a lot of sense w.r.t sustainability. A reminder that Framasoft's a worthy cause to donate to if you are looking for causes to support!
  - dopidopHN 4y ago
    They have been around for a while at this point. 20+ years of good work.
sylware 4y ago
Wait, most if not all are not noscript/basic (x)html friendly, what codeberg seems to be. Ok, github.com has most of its critical functions (microsoft has managed not to f*ck it up... yet) working with a noscript/basic (x)html browser, gitlab and bitbucket, not even possible to create an account, and if I recall properly, neither for sourcehut. There are other git services which are noscript/basic (x)html friendly from the ground up, and EU based, but much less popular.
- Munksgaard 4y ago
  I... don't think that's true of Sourcehut? Drew has certainly argued for the fact that websites should be usable without Javascript, so it would surprise me if Sourcehut didn't follow the same standards.
  - sylware 4y ago
    I should test, but isn't there a javascript only captcha at account creation? A few years ago, captchas were long to go thru but at least without that horrible javascript.
gnramires 4y ago
Please keep in mind codeberg runs on donations (like mine :) ). If you join and have resources, consider donating (they're on LiberaPay). Their finances seem healthy and sustainable for now. https://liberapay.com/codeberg/ https://liberapay.com/codeberg/
- Aeolun 4y ago
  $400/month hardly seems sustainable. That pays for hosting and not much else.
  - DJHenk 4y ago
    You can also become a supporting member and donate directly, which is what I did: https://join.codeberg.org/ https://join.codeberg.org/
melony 4y ago
If you are a fan of Java, there's OneDev https://github.com/theonedev/onedev https://github.com/theonedev/onedev https://code.onedev.io/projects/160 https://code.onedev.io/projects/160
- gdrift 4y ago
  And also GitBlit https://gitblit.github.io/gitblit/ https://gitblit.github.io/gitblit/
barbariangrunge 4y ago
Sourcehut was nice and minimal last time I used it. Worth checking out. Also: the creator has a great blog
e12e 4y ago
> Souceforge also has a proprietary free-to-use for open source Git hosting service It's not proprietary? https://sourceforge.net/create/ https://sourceforge.net/create/ > And, as if all of that wasn’t enough, the SourceForge platform runs on Apache Allura which itself is Open Source! https://allura.apache.org/ https://allura.apache.org/

beanaroo 4y ago

Also proprietary and relatively new on the scene: https://www.jetbrains.com/space/ https://www.jetbrains.com/space/

ChristianGeek 4y ago
Has anyone tried this yet? It looks promising, especially with JetBrains behind it.

psychoslave 4y ago

https://www.tuxfamily.org/ https://www.tuxfamily.org/

User23 4y ago

Let's not forget https://savannah.gnu.org/ https://savannah.gnu.org/.

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago

Github and Bitbucket will shut you down on a whim of twitter sharia police https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/c-plus-equality-c https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/c-plus-equality-c I suggest to use and support the alternative that explicitly promises not to engage in censorship - gitgud.io

slow_typist 4y ago

gitlab and github both provide a program that runs on your raspi and executes the ci pipeline. Search for ‘runner‘. As a solo developer, you can even install the runner on your laptop. It will only be needed while you’re connected to the network anyways.

hypnotortoise 4y ago

You forgot the most important one for the future https://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/

alexvoda 4y ago

Didn't Sourceforge open source their forge server software. IIRC it is an Apache project now.

severino 4y ago

Gitee (gitee.com) is also a free hosting service that can be used for OSS, afaik.

bauruine 4y ago
Which is a Chinese site hosted behind the GFW. I can't even access the site because they block my IP address. I really hope OSS projects don't consider them for their hosting.
- severino 4y ago
  I guess it's the same stuff developers from other countries like Iran, Syria, etc., face when trying to work with Github. It's a shame many OSS projects find providers like these OK when there should be plenty of alternatives that don't block users by country.
computerfriend 4y ago
Subject to mandatory review by a censor before your code gets published. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gitee-chinas-answer-github-review-093000997.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gitee-chinas-answer-github-re...
mistrial9 4y ago
China-based
- severino 4y ago
  I know, but not all of the alternatives noted by the parent post are hosted in Europe, either. Some are US based, and it doesn't mean your project can't be subject to censorship.
RobotToaster 4y ago
Fun fact, they're literally backed by the Chinese government who are trying to promote open source, I assume because it can't be embargoed. On the bright side I suppose that means they shouldn't have any of those pesky commercial pressures to start charging people. I don't think I need to say what the down sides are.

sva_ 4y ago

> gitlab Pretty sure GitLab is open source.

ptman 4y ago
Open core
TAForObvReasons 4y ago
GitLab is a nuanced situation. There is a FOSS GitLab https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss The hosted gitlab.com instance uses EE features so parent is correct to say that the gitlab.com site is not open source.
- hk__2 4y ago
  > The hosted gitlab.com instance uses EE features so parent is correct to say that the gitlab.com site is not open source. It’s OSS but with proprietary parts. That’s the issue with the term "open-source": their source code is indeed open [1] but it’s not 100% free (as in freedom). Edit: mmh apparently I’m mistaken; according to another commenter this is called "open-core" and not "open-source" [2]. [1]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33237641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33237641
  - CameronNemo 4y ago
    Another term you might be looking for is "source available", meaning you can read the source code but not modify or distribute it without a license.

TAForObvReasons 4y ago

Codeberg source https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/gitea https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/gitea Codeberg is a fork of Gitea https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea which curiously uses GitHub for hosting.

hk1337 4y ago
Didn't even change the readme, it seems. *EDIT* https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/ I'm guessing they're just maintaining their own copy and Codeberg is more about the service rather than being another git hosting project.

jpe90 4y ago

I tried out self hosting on my $5/mo VPS and found it much easier than expected. https://jeskin.net/blog/self-hosting-git-with-stagit/ https://jeskin.net/blog/self-hosting-git-with-stagit/

jcul 4y ago
Stagit looks really nice and lightweight. I like the idea of generating static webpages, it sounds great for read only content. However, it doesn't sound very good for collaboration. Someone can come your repo but it doesn't seem easy for them to submit changes back upstream to your repo?
- jpe90 4y ago
  The best way to collaborate would be just sending patches, either with git send-email or as an attachment to a regular message. Then the author applies them and the repo/stagit will display the change. https://git-send-email.io/ https://git-send-email.io/
giobox 4y ago
Can't you just run gitlab or whatever else out of a container in 5 seconds nowadays? Map a single volume and you are likely done. Its not that it's hard to self host that I choose to use third party git services (its clearly not!), it's just that the benefits of self hosting a git repository are increasingly few unless you have strict security requirements etc etc, and the free options are so good now. Running self hosted git is trivial in 2022 if you really need to, with many one-line container deployment options to choose from. > https://registry.hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ https://registry.hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/ While it might be fun to self-host, a 5 dollar a month fee to run it is also not price competitive with the free or paid individual tiers at github.com for a single user too. I'd probably only do this if the git repo was being hosted on my home LAN. > https://github.com/pricing https://github.com/pricing
- jpe90 4y ago
  Yeah I'm sure you could. I use that VPS for my blog and personal projects also so I wanted to keep resource utilization to a minimum and not administer a webapp.

capableweb 4y ago

Worth noting as well, from the list of various hosting services, Codeberg is the only one explicitly for FOSS software and not for proprietary software. Sourcehut seems to be in the box of everything for running the service is FOSS but they would be OK with hosting non-FOSS software, whereas Codeberg isn't for hosting proprietary software at all. From the FAQ (https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#is-it-allowed-to-host-non-free-software%3F https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#is-it-allowed...): > Is it allowed to host non-free software? > Our mission is to support the creation and development of Free Software; therefore we only allow repos licensed under an OSI/FSF-approved license. For more details see Licensing article. However, we sometimes tolerate repositories that aren't perfectly licensed and focus on spreading awareness on the topic of improper FLOSS licensing and its issues. > Can I host private (non-licensed) repositories? > Codeberg is intended for free and open source content. [...]

knowledge-clay 4y ago
There was a discussion on sourcehut about making this change to their TOS, not sure what happened with it though https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CC32T7UNXIK7O.3QD7A1EJDIGAQ%40homura%3E https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CC32T7UNXIK7O....

bee_rider 4y ago

I think we should emphasize that Sourcehut is just currently free while it is in alpha. Mr. DeVault been very upfront about the fact that he's planning to start charging eventually. From his FAQ, https://man.sr.ht/billing-faq.md#why-should-i-pay-when-github-gitlab-etc-are-free https://man.sr.ht/billing-faq.md#why-should-i-pay-when-githu... The point is to set up a responsible financial situation between himself and the users and avoid the bad incentive structures that "free" services have ("Free" until VC money runs out, at which point it is roll of the dice whether they'll be monetized through acquisition, or some annoying scheme).

NeutralForest 4y ago
The guy very SourceHut is very nice and dedicated to the project, his blog is also interesting to understand the philosophy being SourceHut.
endgame 4y ago
I've been paying for years, because I agree with these principles. It's a good service.
_ktx2 4y ago
Does SourceHut still have an aversion to Kubernetes and Docker? Last year I was trying to setup SourceHut on my home infra (which is Docker/SystemD based, but was Kubernetes based) and I was told I'd be banned if I asked about it, and that they don't support that kind of software. Super weird interaction from someone I otherwise used to admire.
- dspillett 4y ago
  Some Kubernetes and Docker people get somewhat religious about it, and rather than taking “I/we don't support that and don't have any immediate plans to, but feel free to try it yourself” as a valid response will plead, nag, and otherwise try to cajole a project's maintainer's to reconsider, sometimes being irritatingly persistent and calling into question a person's overall intelligence because they don't currently want to directly support that plumbing. Such discussions can become time-consuming, tiresome, and (if really persistent in trying to convert them to the cause) difficult to just ignore. > be banned if I asked about it I assume this means the maintainer(s) have experienced the above a few times, and have given up trying to be more polite about it! Don't take it personally. If you want to use a tool with that plumbing then feel free to DIY. If you make it work well, perhaps publish your process and/or images and support it for others who need/want that support.

Blackthorn 4y ago

I no longer trust bitbucket after they shut down their mercurial support. That was the thing that differentiated them from everyone else. Why even use them now?

NexRebular 4y ago
I wonder if there even is public mercurial hosting available anymore. This git monoculture is starting to be a bit annoying.
- Aeolun 4y ago
  For the longest time I just couldn’t see what the fuzz (about Git) was about. But after finally switching I don’t think I’d ever go back.
  - ColonelPhantom 4y ago
    What VCS were you coming from, and what makes Git so much nicer? I believe Git and Mercurial are considered to be 'about as good' by most.
- gbear605 4y ago
  SourceHut offers mercurial hosting, though it’s entirely community maintained.
- slondr 4y ago
  Sourcehut.
- alwillis 4y ago
  Heptapod supports a Mercurial hosting service (free for OSS) that’s a fork of GitLab: https://heptapod.net/ https://heptapod.net/
  - Blackthorn 4y ago
    Really appreciate the link. Much prefer mercurial to git on my own stuff.

JanMa 4y ago

Keybase also has support for hosting Git repos: https://book.keybase.io/git https://book.keybase.io/git

hk1337 4y ago
I used to use Keybase for my dotfiles repo but I thought Keybase was on their way out since being bought?
- jcul 4y ago
  Which is a shame, assuming it's true. I thought keybase was really innovative in their use of modern cryptography.
mdaniel 4y ago
I'd exercise caution building on top of it since I don't think Zoom cares about Keybase and I was unable to find any server among their repositories (https://github.com/orgs/keybase/repositories https://github.com/orgs/keybase/repositories) such that one could self-host after Zoom bores of running the Keybase infra

medoc 4y ago

There is also framagit: https://framagit.org/public/projects https://framagit.org/public/projects which is a Gitlab instance run by a French non-profit, Framasoft: https://framasoft.org/en/ https://framasoft.org/en/ I host my project there, no issues.

jszymborski 4y ago
I have a lot of love for framasoft, but beware that they have limited resources and have in the past closed down or geofenced services I was relying on. I think Codeberg's co-op style governance/funding makes a lot of sense w.r.t sustainability. A reminder that Framasoft's a worthy cause to donate to if you are looking for causes to support!
- dopidopHN 4y ago
  They have been around for a while at this point. 20+ years of good work.

sylware 4y ago

Wait, most if not all are not noscript/basic (x)html friendly, what codeberg seems to be. Ok, github.com has most of its critical functions (microsoft has managed not to f*ck it up... yet) working with a noscript/basic (x)html browser, gitlab and bitbucket, not even possible to create an account, and if I recall properly, neither for sourcehut. There are other git services which are noscript/basic (x)html friendly from the ground up, and EU based, but much less popular.

Munksgaard 4y ago
I... don't think that's true of Sourcehut? Drew has certainly argued for the fact that websites should be usable without Javascript, so it would surprise me if Sourcehut didn't follow the same standards.
- sylware 4y ago
  I should test, but isn't there a javascript only captcha at account creation? A few years ago, captchas were long to go thru but at least without that horrible javascript.

gnramires 4y ago

Please keep in mind codeberg runs on donations (like mine :) ). If you join and have resources, consider donating (they're on LiberaPay). Their finances seem healthy and sustainable for now. https://liberapay.com/codeberg/ https://liberapay.com/codeberg/

Aeolun 4y ago
$400/month hardly seems sustainable. That pays for hosting and not much else.
- DJHenk 4y ago
  You can also become a supporting member and donate directly, which is what I did: https://join.codeberg.org/ https://join.codeberg.org/

melony 4y ago

If you are a fan of Java, there's OneDev https://github.com/theonedev/onedev https://github.com/theonedev/onedev https://code.onedev.io/projects/160 https://code.onedev.io/projects/160

gdrift 4y ago
And also GitBlit https://gitblit.github.io/gitblit/ https://gitblit.github.io/gitblit/

barbariangrunge 4y ago

Sourcehut was nice and minimal last time I used it. Worth checking out. Also: the creator has a great blog

e12e 4y ago

> Souceforge also has a proprietary free-to-use for open source Git hosting service It's not proprietary? https://sourceforge.net/create/ https://sourceforge.net/create/ > And, as if all of that wasn’t enough, the SourceForge platform runs on Apache Allura which itself is Open Source! https://allura.apache.org/ https://allura.apache.org/