4 ms·

Actually, they want to implement federation using forgefed [1] into forgejo, the underlying software. [1] https://forgefed.org/ https://forgefed.org/

ffsm8 1y ago
Mmh, that link is dead
- mariusor 1y ago
  In an ironic turn of events the main repo is on github: https://github.com/forgefed/forgefed https://github.com/forgefed/forgefed (and even without any mirrors on codeberg). :)
  - commoner 1y ago
    No, the main ForgeFed repo is on Codeberg: https://codeberg.org/ForgeFed/ForgeFed https://codeberg.org/ForgeFed/ForgeFed The README in both repos links to the main Codeberg repo and says that the GitHub repo is a mirror.
    - mariusor 1y ago
      OK, thanx for the clarification. :)
mariusor 1y ago
Maybe you're eagerness to sing praises to the forgefed project overshadowed the common knowledge that git is already distributed but, git is already distributed. :P I think that's what parent was sarcastically trying to imply.
- overfeed 1y ago
  The first 16 words of your comment makes it very smarmy,v and not including them would have improved it. GP's snark is misplaced, version control is but a subset of what forges offer, git has no social layer[1], and GitHub has a monopoly on this. A distributed social layer via ActivityPub would be a vast improvement over what we have now - at best, non-comprehensive one way synching of issues from GitHub into mirror repos, by way of polling the upstream. 1. Except via email
  - jeffrallen 1y ago
    GitHub must certainly does not have a monopoly on the social aspects of version control. But it does seem, from recent experience with e.g. Mastodon that the revealed preferences of users of social apps is for centralization. Even users (software developers) who likely have a higher familiarity with the pros and cons of centralization. Also: Ask yourself why did Linus "solve" VC decentralization, but not social software decentralization. Probably because one is "easy" and the other is "not obviously possible". :)
    - overfeed 1y ago
      > Ask yourself why did Linus "solve" VC decentralization, but not social software decentralization Perhaps because it was out of scope? Linux kernel diffs are emailed, so Linus solved for email as the social layer, and it works well with mailing lists. If Pull Requests had predated git and the kernel had used them, Linus would have solved for

ffsm8 1y ago

Mmh, that link is dead

mariusor 1y ago
In an ironic turn of events the main repo is on github: https://github.com/forgefed/forgefed https://github.com/forgefed/forgefed (and even without any mirrors on codeberg). :)
- commoner 1y ago
  No, the main ForgeFed repo is on Codeberg: https://codeberg.org/ForgeFed/ForgeFed https://codeberg.org/ForgeFed/ForgeFed The README in both repos links to the main Codeberg repo and says that the GitHub repo is a mirror.
  - mariusor 1y ago
    OK, thanx for the clarification. :)

mariusor 1y ago

Maybe you're eagerness to sing praises to the forgefed project overshadowed the common knowledge that git is already distributed but, git is already distributed. :P I think that's what parent was sarcastically trying to imply.

overfeed 1y ago
The first 16 words of your comment makes it very smarmy,v and not including them would have improved it. GP's snark is misplaced, version control is but a subset of what forges offer, git has no social layer[1], and GitHub has a monopoly on this. A distributed social layer via ActivityPub would be a vast improvement over what we have now - at best, non-comprehensive one way synching of issues from GitHub into mirror repos, by way of polling the upstream. 1. Except via email
- jeffrallen 1y ago
  GitHub must certainly does not have a monopoly on the social aspects of version control. But it does seem, from recent experience with e.g. Mastodon that the revealed preferences of users of social apps is for centralization. Even users (software developers) who likely have a higher familiarity with the pros and cons of centralization. Also: Ask yourself why did Linus "solve" VC decentralization, but not social software decentralization. Probably because one is "easy" and the other is "not obviously possible". :)
  - overfeed 1y ago
    > Ask yourself why did Linus "solve" VC decentralization, but not social software decentralization Perhaps because it was out of scope? Linux kernel diffs are emailed, so Linus solved for email as the social layer, and it works well with mailing lists. If Pull Requests had predated git and the kernel had used them, Linus would have solved for