4 ms·

Forgejo v13.0 Is Available

106 points by birdculture 1y ago

kstrauser 1y ago
Oooh, thanks for adding moderation features before I even wished I had them! I saw the links to merged ActivityPub PRs but it wasn't clear to me: what's the status of AP support now?
- mindcrash 1y ago
  Still very much work in progress. I believe you can follow the status here (Federation roadmap): https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/federation/src/branch/main/FederationRoadmap.md https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/federation/src/branch/m...
- preya2k 1y ago
  I found it confusing, too. In the detailed changelog it seems that some PRs for following remote users have been merged, but I assume it's not complete/usable, yet. So from what I understand, no new "usable" federation features made it to the v13 release. Please correct me, if I'm wrong.
lloydatkinson 1y ago
Four major versions so far this year seems a lot
- cornstalks 1y ago
  They release on a fixed schedule of once per quarter: https://forgejo.org/docs/v13.0/admin/release-schedule/ https://forgejo.org/docs/v13.0/admin/release-schedule/ These aren't semantic version numbers.
  - zenoprax 1y ago
    Rant incoming... This is the least intuitive and least useful versioning system as a user and sysadmin that I have seen in a long time. Calendar releases ought to follow calendar naming conventions (eg. 25.3 or 20251017 etc.) and non-semantic versioning should try to be obvious. From what I can tell: "multiples of 'four minus one' are LTS" is the numbering scheme (but the software is only good for a year so... why not just call it Forgejo v2025 for its March release?) https://codeberg.org/forgejo/-/packages/container/forgejo/versions https://codeberg.org/forgejo/-/packages/container/forgejo/ve... At the very least, a stable "LTS" tag would help. The significance of Forgejo 13.0 is basically zero. A two-year cadence Debian release is newsworthy. Even if this were an LTS this is still not that interesting (unless there is some other context or significance that I'm not aware of). Rant over.
    - ezst 1y ago
      Their project, their rules. I don't know why you would think that your ideologies automatically translate into something that's convenient or better for them.
      - zenoprax 1y ago
        Fair - I don't know why they've chosen the current numbering so I looked it up: https://forgejo.org/docs/v11.0/user/versions/ https://forgejo.org/docs/v11.0/user/versions/ They use SemVer so there really are Major breaking changes every 3 months by their own definition. I suppose my assumption was that the software was basically "feature complete" but they must be working hard to add more to it.
    - jwildeboer 1y ago
      If you go to their release page, you will see two versions listed. The current stable release (13.0) and the explicitlly marked LTS version (11), both with clearly visible end of support dates. Not sure how much simpler it can get :)
      - zenoprax 1y ago
        My annoyance was based on that page :D But I've since learned that they are in fact using SemVer which means it was my expectations of what the project was trying to do that was mismatched. I didn't expect Major updates to mirror a quarterly cadence.
sschueller 1y ago
I'm still waiting for them to add sub-folder or groups/projects support like in gitlab. As soon as they have it I'm migrating away from gitlab.
- mindcrash 1y ago
  It's on the radar (as Gitea is also actively working on this - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/35295 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/35295), but I suspect you can not expect anything for a while: "Upstream Proposal: Repository Grouping/Subgroups in Forgejo": https://codeberg.org/fedora/forgejo-deployment/issues/224 https://codeberg.org/fedora/forgejo-deployment/issues/224 "feat: extend Forgejo URL structure from organisation/repository to organisation/project/repository": https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9550 https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9550
- trailbits 1y ago
  I just create new orgs to group related repositories together. Works well for a small team.
NoboruWataya 1y ago
v13.0.0 apparently has a nasty bug, recommended to upgrade to 13.0.1 directly: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/milestone/21377 https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/milestone/21377
- bravetraveler 1y ago
  For those interested in such things, 11.0.6 is the current LTS
mfenniak 1y ago
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. https://forgejo.org/2025-10-release-v13-0/#avatar-image-privacy https://forgejo.org/2025-10-release-v13-0/#avatar-image-priv...
neko_ranger 1y ago
Was literally thinking about setting this up this weekend. If I can get renovate working to auto update dependencies, I can move off of github. To me, dependabot is github's killer feature
- preisschild 1y ago
  Renovatebot works also really well, been using it with self hosted Gitlab for years
  - Kudos 1y ago
    Same but with Forgejo and for the last 6 months.
zokier 1y ago
I have been using forgejo for a very small sideproject of mine and so far I have enjoyed it, but admittedly I use probably like 10% of the features. But sometimes that is all you need, and forgejo is quite nice and simple to configure and run so that works out. My impression is that it is much more lightweight (and faster) than gitlab, although I haven't done actual comparisons.
meonkeys 1y ago
I noticed I was on 8 today. Running in Docker. In case this helps anyone else: Upgrade from 8 to 9 worked fine (just by switching the Docker label), then from 9 to 11 worked, and since 11 is LTS I'll stay on that for a while. https://forgejo.org/releases/ https://forgejo.org/releases/ says 11 is supported until July 16, 2026.
- 000ooo000 1y ago
  Thanks. I'm on 9 and was wondering what the path would be like.
- mdpm 1y ago
  Same, except when 12 came out, I did 8 -> 12. A backup between each, but unneeded, it was seamless - just incremental migrations per release.

106 points by birdculture 1y ago

Oooh, thanks for adding moderation features before I even wished I had them! I saw the links to merged ActivityPub PRs but it wasn't clear to me: what's the status of AP support now?

mindcrash 1y ago
Still very much work in progress. I believe you can follow the status here (Federation roadmap): https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/federation/src/branch/main/FederationRoadmap.md https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/federation/src/branch/m...
preya2k 1y ago
I found it confusing, too. In the detailed changelog it seems that some PRs for following remote users have been merged, but I assume it's not complete/usable, yet. So from what I understand, no new "usable" federation features made it to the v13 release. Please correct me, if I'm wrong.

lloydatkinson 1y ago

Four major versions so far this year seems a lot

cornstalks 1y ago
They release on a fixed schedule of once per quarter: https://forgejo.org/docs/v13.0/admin/release-schedule/ https://forgejo.org/docs/v13.0/admin/release-schedule/ These aren't semantic version numbers.
- zenoprax 1y ago
  Rant incoming... This is the least intuitive and least useful versioning system as a user and sysadmin that I have seen in a long time. Calendar releases ought to follow calendar naming conventions (eg. 25.3 or 20251017 etc.) and non-semantic versioning should try to be obvious. From what I can tell: "multiples of 'four minus one' are LTS" is the numbering scheme (but the software is only good for a year so... why not just call it Forgejo v2025 for its March release?) https://codeberg.org/forgejo/-/packages/container/forgejo/versions https://codeberg.org/forgejo/-/packages/container/forgejo/ve... At the very least, a stable "LTS" tag would help. The significance of Forgejo 13.0 is basically zero. A two-year cadence Debian release is newsworthy. Even if this were an LTS this is still not that interesting (unless there is some other context or significance that I'm not aware of). Rant over.
  - ezst 1y ago
    Their project, their rules. I don't know why you would think that your ideologies automatically translate into something that's convenient or better for them.
    - zenoprax 1y ago
      Fair - I don't know why they've chosen the current numbering so I looked it up: https://forgejo.org/docs/v11.0/user/versions/ https://forgejo.org/docs/v11.0/user/versions/ They use SemVer so there really are Major breaking changes every 3 months by their own definition. I suppose my assumption was that the software was basically "feature complete" but they must be working hard to add more to it.
  - jwildeboer 1y ago
    If you go to their release page, you will see two versions listed. The current stable release (13.0) and the explicitlly marked LTS version (11), both with clearly visible end of support dates. Not sure how much simpler it can get :)
    - zenoprax 1y ago
      My annoyance was based on that page :D But I've since learned that they are in fact using SemVer which means it was my expectations of what the project was trying to do that was mismatched. I didn't expect Major updates to mirror a quarterly cadence.

sschueller 1y ago

I'm still waiting for them to add sub-folder or groups/projects support like in gitlab. As soon as they have it I'm migrating away from gitlab.

mindcrash 1y ago
It's on the radar (as Gitea is also actively working on this - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/35295 https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/35295), but I suspect you can not expect anything for a while: "Upstream Proposal: Repository Grouping/Subgroups in Forgejo": https://codeberg.org/fedora/forgejo-deployment/issues/224 https://codeberg.org/fedora/forgejo-deployment/issues/224 "feat: extend Forgejo URL structure from organisation/repository to organisation/project/repository": https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9550 https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9550
trailbits 1y ago
I just create new orgs to group related repositories together. Works well for a small team.

NoboruWataya 1y ago

v13.0.0 apparently has a nasty bug, recommended to upgrade to 13.0.1 directly: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/milestone/21377 https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/milestone/21377

bravetraveler 1y ago
For those interested in such things, 11.0.6 is the current LTS

mfenniak 1y ago

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. https://forgejo.org/2025-10-release-v13-0/#avatar-image-privacy https://forgejo.org/2025-10-release-v13-0/#avatar-image-priv...

neko_ranger 1y ago

Was literally thinking about setting this up this weekend. If I can get renovate working to auto update dependencies, I can move off of github. To me, dependabot is github's killer feature

preisschild 1y ago
Renovatebot works also really well, been using it with self hosted Gitlab for years
- Kudos 1y ago
  Same but with Forgejo and for the last 6 months.

zokier 1y ago

I have been using forgejo for a very small sideproject of mine and so far I have enjoyed it, but admittedly I use probably like 10% of the features. But sometimes that is all you need, and forgejo is quite nice and simple to configure and run so that works out. My impression is that it is much more lightweight (and faster) than gitlab, although I haven't done actual comparisons.

meonkeys 1y ago

I noticed I was on 8 today. Running in Docker. In case this helps anyone else: Upgrade from 8 to 9 worked fine (just by switching the Docker label), then from 9 to 11 worked, and since 11 is LTS I'll stay on that for a while. https://forgejo.org/releases/ https://forgejo.org/releases/ says 11 is supported until July 16, 2026.

000ooo000 1y ago
Thanks. I'm on 9 and was wondering what the path would be like.
mdpm 1y ago
Same, except when 12 came out, I did 8 -> 12. A backup between each, but unneeded, it was seamless - just incremental migrations per release.