I raised many of the author's point about Sourcehut several times. I'm an, enthusiastic FOSS supporter who has always advocated for alternatives to Github. But

I raised many of the author's point about Sourcehut several times. I'm an, enthusiastic FOSS supporter who has always advocated for alternatives to Github. But Sourcehut seems to take the worst out of everything. It strips down all the features, provides a web interface that seems to come out of the 1990s, removes anything that is even vaguely interactive in favour of emails, and it turns reviews and PRs a mess of emails and patch files that is impossible to browse. Seriously, when we say that Github is bad, it doesn't mean that the solution is to get back to the software development cycles of the early 2000s and throw out of the window all the innovations made in the past two decades. Sourcehut's extremely elitist and proudly feature-poor approach is only pushing away potential users and contributors, and I don't think it's doing a good favour to the community. I would advise the author to give Forgejo a try (Gitea has almost become fully enshittified with its business plans and vision, so I wouldn't recommend it to anyone anymore). Everything is very similar to Github, but FOSS and self-hosted, and it takes a tiny fraction to run than the resources required by that shapeless beast called Gitlab.