25 ms·

It took a long time, but GitHub has finally (thankfully) shipped privacy settings that allow you to disable the way it broadcasts/publicizes your every move on

It took a long time, but GitHub has finally (thankfully) shipped privacy settings that allow you to disable the way it broadcasts/publicizes your every move on your profile page. Does Codeberg or Gitea allow this yet? (They really should have been the first to do so...) It would be nice to also disable the public listing of repositories for your profile page and to control it for organizations, too. (Not talking about private repos. Instead: these should be ordinary repos that remain accessible to anyone who has the link, but they are simply not aggregated into a single unified list that's available to anyone who clicks over to the "Repositories" tab. Think of them like unlisted YouTube videos, except they are all unlisted by default, rather than having to specifically designate each one as being unlisted—although that would work, too, it's just not the way it should be implemented.)

capableweb 4y ago
Codeberg is not for private code, it's explicitly for "Free and Open Source Software". Probably it would still make sense to have some privacy for authors/contributors, so you can't simply list all activity by going to someones profile on the website, but the repositories should still be findable, browsable and public, as that's the goal of repositories in the organization Codeberg e.V.
- pwdisswordfish0 4y ago
  - capableweb 4y ago
    - pwdisswordfish0 4y ago
      Two questions: 1. What can you point to that explains or even suggests that repos "should [...] be findable" directly on codeberg.org and for "people browsing [it] and pages within"? E.g. that creating an unlisted repo and then setting up a publicly facing project landing page/mailing list/etc. that independently refers potential contributors to the repo but doesn't make available a top-level index of all such (possibly unrelated) repos that a given person controls, is something that would run afoul of either Codeberg's policies or goals. 2. What is your relationship to the Codeberg e.V. organization?
      - TobTobXX 4y ago
        I'd suggest you read their ToS[0], specifically section 2.1(.2). It shows that they'd really like you to make all content public. To guarantee that publicity, they rake care of the listing. There is (currently?) no option for unlisted repos. just either public or private. And by the observing the way they think about privare repos, you can form an idea about how they'd think about unlisted repos. [0]: https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md
        pwdisswordfish0 4y ago
        I've read that. It doesn't say or even suggest anything like what we're actually talking about here. Someone pointing to those terms in the TOS is either confused about what this discussion is about, confused about what exactly the TOS is addressing, or both.
      - capableweb 4y ago
        > 1. What can you point to that explains or even suggests that repos "should [...] be findable" directly on codeberg.org and for "people browsing [it] and pages within"? E.g. that creating an unlisted repo and then setting up a publicly facing project landing page/mailing list/etc. that independently refers potential contributors to the repo but doesn't make available a top-level index of all such (possibly unrelated) repos that a given person controls, is something that would run afoul of either Codeberg's policies or goals. Here is some resources directly from Codeberg.org to explain the position: > Codeberg is a collaboration platform and Git hosting for Free and Open Source Software, content and projects. https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/ > Can I host private (non-licensed) repositories? > Codeberg is intended for free and open source content. However, as per our Terms of Service [https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md#2-allowed-content-usage https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md#2-allowe...], > Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like storing secrets, team-internal discussions or hiding projects from the public until they're ready for usage and/or contribution. > Since this is not what Codeberg is meant for in a more narrow sense, stricter limitations might be implemented in the future. https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#can-i-host-private-(non-licensed)-repositories%3F https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#can-i-host-pr... > The mission of Codeberg e.V. is to build and maintain a free collaboration platform for creating, archiving, and preserving code and to document its development process. https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#our-mission https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#... > [2] (1) The purpose of the association is to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultural Works) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) > [2] (2) For the collection and distribution of free content, open and commonly used Repository and Version Control Systems ("RCS" and "VCS") that save and preserve the whole history of the creation and improvement of Open Source software and make it freely available to society on the Internet, should be primarily but not exclusively used and generally made available. https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/en/bylaws.md#2-purpose-and-tasks https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/en/bylaws.... > 2. What is your relationship to the Codeberg e.V. organization? I'm participating as an "Private Person" with a "Active Membership" in Codeberg e.V. What is your own relationship to Codeberg?
  - runald 4y ago
    Off-topic, but I'm really amazed that HN account lasted for 2 years. I've seen pwdis accounts before, but they quickly get vandalized and locked out. Is this a lucky account, or is there a mod intervention? Edit: oh wait, never mind, the profile does confirm that dang is involved. Interesting stuffs.
    - capableweb 4y ago
      > the profile does confirm that dang is involved Somehow I doubt this. If one account is shared by many, how is "users should have an identity that others can relate to" supposed to be possible? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create accounts routinely. HN is a community—users should have an identity that others can relate to.
      - runald 4y ago
        I don't think shared accounts violates the guidelines since no accounts are routinely created from sharing it. Having an identity to relate seems to be an ideal preference, but not a hard requirement. Some people do routinely create new accounts anyway to avoid fingerprinting writing styles. Anyway, shared accounts are interesting because it's a hack on the signin system to allow a more anonymous posting. It reminds of Stallman's aversion to password in the early days, and repeats his login ID as his password.[0] [0] https://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch07.html https://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch07.html
  - nonethewiser 4y ago
    Habit? So you've identified this poster doing this before?
rapnie 4y ago
It may be that there is an issue in the Gitea tracker. The Forgejo tracker is a clean slate, but you could request this at: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues
mistrial9 4y ago
> allow you to disable the way it broadcasts/publicizes your every move on your profile page. .. except from the owners of Github, and their paid clients ! you don't realize this?

capableweb 4y ago

Codeberg is not for private code, it's explicitly for "Free and Open Source Software". Probably it would still make sense to have some privacy for authors/contributors, so you can't simply list all activity by going to someones profile on the website, but the repositories should still be findable, browsable and public, as that's the goal of repositories in the organization Codeberg e.V.

pwdisswordfish0 4y ago
- capableweb 4y ago
  - pwdisswordfish0 4y ago
    Two questions: 1. What can you point to that explains or even suggests that repos "should [...] be findable" directly on codeberg.org and for "people browsing [it] and pages within"? E.g. that creating an unlisted repo and then setting up a publicly facing project landing page/mailing list/etc. that independently refers potential contributors to the repo but doesn't make available a top-level index of all such (possibly unrelated) repos that a given person controls, is something that would run afoul of either Codeberg's policies or goals. 2. What is your relationship to the Codeberg e.V. organization?
    - TobTobXX 4y ago
      I'd suggest you read their ToS[0], specifically section 2.1(.2). It shows that they'd really like you to make all content public. To guarantee that publicity, they rake care of the listing. There is (currently?) no option for unlisted repos. just either public or private. And by the observing the way they think about privare repos, you can form an idea about how they'd think about unlisted repos. [0]: https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md
      - pwdisswordfish0 4y ago
        I've read that. It doesn't say or even suggest anything like what we're actually talking about here. Someone pointing to those terms in the TOS is either confused about what this discussion is about, confused about what exactly the TOS is addressing, or both.
    - capableweb 4y ago
      > 1. What can you point to that explains or even suggests that repos "should [...] be findable" directly on codeberg.org and for "people browsing [it] and pages within"? E.g. that creating an unlisted repo and then setting up a publicly facing project landing page/mailing list/etc. that independently refers potential contributors to the repo but doesn't make available a top-level index of all such (possibly unrelated) repos that a given person controls, is something that would run afoul of either Codeberg's policies or goals. Here is some resources directly from Codeberg.org to explain the position: > Codeberg is a collaboration platform and Git hosting for Free and Open Source Software, content and projects. https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/ > Can I host private (non-licensed) repositories? > Codeberg is intended for free and open source content. However, as per our Terms of Service [https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md#2-allowed-content-usage https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/TermsOfUse.md#2-allowe...], > Private repositories are only allowed for things required for FLOSS projects, like storing secrets, team-internal discussions or hiding projects from the public until they're ready for usage and/or contribution. > Since this is not what Codeberg is meant for in a more narrow sense, stricter limitations might be implemented in the future. https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#can-i-host-private-(non-licensed)-repositories%3F https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#can-i-host-pr... > The mission of Codeberg e.V. is to build and maintain a free collaboration platform for creating, archiving, and preserving code and to document its development process. https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#our-mission https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#... > [2] (1) The purpose of the association is to promote the creation, collection, distribution and preservation of Free Content (Open Content, Free Cultural Works) and Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) > [2] (2) For the collection and distribution of free content, open and commonly used Repository and Version Control Systems ("RCS" and "VCS") that save and preserve the whole history of the creation and improvement of Open Source software and make it freely available to society on the Internet, should be primarily but not exclusively used and generally made available. https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/en/bylaws.md#2-purpose-and-tasks https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/en/bylaws.... > 2. What is your relationship to the Codeberg e.V. organization? I'm participating as an "Private Person" with a "Active Membership" in Codeberg e.V. What is your own relationship to Codeberg?
- runald 4y ago
  Off-topic, but I'm really amazed that HN account lasted for 2 years. I've seen pwdis accounts before, but they quickly get vandalized and locked out. Is this a lucky account, or is there a mod intervention? Edit: oh wait, never mind, the profile does confirm that dang is involved. Interesting stuffs.
  - capableweb 4y ago
    > the profile does confirm that dang is involved Somehow I doubt this. If one account is shared by many, how is "users should have an identity that others can relate to" supposed to be possible? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Throwaway accounts are ok for sensitive information, but please don't create accounts routinely. HN is a community—users should have an identity that others can relate to.
    - runald 4y ago
      I don't think shared accounts violates the guidelines since no accounts are routinely created from sharing it. Having an identity to relate seems to be an ideal preference, but not a hard requirement. Some people do routinely create new accounts anyway to avoid fingerprinting writing styles. Anyway, shared accounts are interesting because it's a hack on the signin system to allow a more anonymous posting. It reminds of Stallman's aversion to password in the early days, and repeats his login ID as his password.[0] [0] https://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch07.html https://www.oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ch07.html
- nonethewiser 4y ago
  Habit? So you've identified this poster doing this before?

rapnie 4y ago

It may be that there is an issue in the Gitea tracker. The Forgejo tracker is a clean slate, but you could request this at: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues

mistrial9 4y ago

> allow you to disable the way it broadcasts/publicizes your every move on your profile page. .. except from the owners of Github, and their paid clients ! you don't realize this?