10 ms·
Ask HN: Alternatives to GitHub
Github has been down consistently over the last few months - does it make sense to switch to alternatives?
- cautiouscat 2mo agoI use Forgejo + Gitea for my home forge, then Tangled for anything I want to share with my own runner. I self host Lore for my gamedev projects.
- herpdyderp 2mo agoI'm working on self hosting Gitea right now. Hopefully it goes well!
- techknowlogick 2mo agoBest of luck! I'm one of the project leads of Gitea, and if you run into any issues please feel free to hop into our chat:)
- amysox 2mo agoI've been self-hosting Gitea for years, and moved everything I had on GitHub off at the time of the Micro$oft takeover. With Amsterdam[0], I've put it back on GitHub, but only as a mirror to increase visibility of the code. My erbosoft.com Git server will always remain the "source of truth" for the project. [0] https://git.erbosoft.com/amy/amsterdam https://git.erbosoft.com/amy/amsterdam and https://github.com/amysoxcolo/amsterdam https://github.com/amysoxcolo/amsterdam
- melezhik 2mo agoDSCI - http://deadsimpleci.sparrowhub.io http://deadsimpleci.sparrowhub.io - lightweight ( single binary written on golang ) - ci runner embedded ( podman / docker ) - pipelines are written on general programming languages - no YAML craziness - Perl/Python/Bash/Raku/Powershell/Php/Golang support - code editor
- dawn3727 2mo agoYou might want to consider checking out GitLab and Gitee.
- teekert 2mo agoYou mean Gitea [0], a community-driven fork is Forgejo. There was some drama, have to admit is still don't really understand it (ask an llm I'd say). Codeberg [2] uses Forgejo and offers it as a hosted service. [0] https://about.gitea.com/ https://about.gitea.com/ [1] https://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/ [2] https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/
- Havoc 2mo agoOther way round. Forgejo is a fork of gitea
- teekert 2mo agoThat's what I said, but indeed in a very bad way :)
- esseph 2mo agoNo, it's not what you said. Gitea is a fork of Gogs. Forgejo is a fork of Gitea. Codeberg folks forked Gitea to create forgejo.
- esseph 2mo ago"Forgejo was created in October 2022 after a for profit company took over the Gitea project. It exists under the umbrella of a non-profit organization, Codeberg e.V. and is developed in the interest of the general public." https://forgejo.org/compare-to-gitea/ https://forgejo.org/compare-to-gitea/
- arccy 2mo agoTechnically gitee is also a git hosting provider: https://gitee.com/ https://gitee.com/ (scroll to bottom right corner for language switcher).
- AnonFBC 2mo ago[dead]
- ashton314 2mo agoForgejo is splendid. Codeberg is a hosted instance; depending on what you’re developing it may or may not be a good fit for you. But the Forgejo stack itself is decently light-weight to self-host, very fast to use, and is easy to navigate.
- notpushkin 2mo ago> depending on what you’re developing it may or may not be a good fit for you I think if your project is free / open source (edit: and you don’t use LLMs/AI), Codeberg is the a good starting point at least. You can move on to a self-hosted instance if you feel you’ve outgrown it, but even for larger projects I think you can get away with self-hosting just the CI runners. And don’t forget to donate! https://donate.codeberg.org/ https://donate.codeberg.org/ / https://join.codeberg.org/ https://join.codeberg.org/
- bdlowery 2mo agoif you use ai to program at all you can't use codeberg.
- notpushkin 2mo agoGood point, I forgot they’ve recently banned it. Updated my comment.
- cxr 2mo agoYou've made the same exaggerated claim in two comments. Not only are you not banned from Codeberg if you have used LLMs to help you write code "in any of your projects", but you're not even prohibited from using LLMs to help you develop projects that you host on Codeberg. What you can't do is "share projects that mostly consist of code written by 'generative AI'-tools". <https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/commit/71149c7fc95ccfeae36109b5cddca339e4aa1473 https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/commit/71149c7fc95ccfeae36...>
- wild_egg 2mo ago
- quaintdev 2mo agohttps://tangled.sh https://tangled.sh
- ch71r22 2mo agoHow easy is it to set up and run this for private repos? It looks like it has so many cool features -- stacked PRs, jujutsu support, CI in Nix VMs. But I've never tried it because it sounds like (at least by default) it's some sort of decentralized, peer-to-peer public thing
- radicalriddler 2mo agoYeah, only open for public repositories until Atproto finishes their permissioned data spec.
- quasigod 2mo agoYou'll have to wait a bit for private repo support unfortunately. Once its ready setting up a knot via Nix or Docker is super easy: https://docs.tangled.org/knot-self-hosting-guide#knot-self-hosting-guide https://docs.tangled.org/knot-self-hosting-guide#knot-self-h...
- izolate 2mo agoFirst I've heard of this, but they seem to be a young, smart and energetic team on a great trajectory. The atproto choice is interesting, fits their social-minded goal.
- polycaster 2mo agohttps://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/
- bobkb 2mo agoIs their CI and CD workflow robust like gitlab/github ?
- Arrowmaster 2mo agoYou can use any CI/CD you want. The only reason GH is popular is that it's free for public repos. But Forgejo does have a GH like CI/CD. If you really care about good CI/CD then you should try some of the alternatives out and decide what works best for your needs.
- Valodim 2mo agoWhat can you recommend?
- Arrowmaster 2mo agoI don't have any specific recommendations other than do as little in your CI/CD as possible, instead do as much as possible in your build system or scripts that get called by CI/CD. This way you can migrate with less work or run locally when you want.
- Bnjoroge 2mo agoHopefully a good spot to plug my own project, preloop, which is a drop-in replacement of Github actions(both the runners and control plane) that runs locally or self-hosted in isoalted microvms, and supports debug-on-failure. You can also push to the server, run CI and then optionally create a draft PR. Not quite production-ready yet(for the self-hosted part), but the local part works well. We implement the official runner protocol 100% unlike act/gitea/forgejo, so your workflows are more likely to work out of the box with preloop(forgejo has the closest compatibility with Github Actions though so it's a good off-Github option) and we use microvms so no DinD issues. I'm working on getting the official runner vm image up to reduce any environment incompatibilities. Feel free to try it out: https://github.com/preloopdev/preloop https://github.com/preloopdev/preloop
- yogsototh 2mo agoI personally host a forgejo instance on a private VPS ; so far almost no maintenance except protecting it from ai-crawlers[#1]. If you don't want the hassle, codeberg.org is a public instance of forgejo. [#1]: https://her.esy.fun/posts/0031-how-i-protect-my-forgejo-instance-from-ai-web-crawlers/index.html https://her.esy.fun/posts/0031-how-i-protect-my-forgejo-inst... I configure my local repositories to push on both Github and my forgejo instance. I am not using the CI much for my private projects (local tests are enough in my case).
- mariocesar 2mo agoI answered this in another thread, if you're already running a large GitHub organization, GitLab is the closest alternative in terms of features A big plus is that it also has an open-source Community Edition that you can self-host
- Nemo_bis 2mo agoThere are also many consultancies able to provide professional support with running it in your org, including migrations.
- ktm5j 2mo agoMy org self hosts the community version of gitlab and we are perfectly happy with it. Manage your own infrastructure, put the work into maintaining it and you'll have much fewer headaches.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- arsenkk 2mo agocursor are launching a new one soon - https://cursor.com/origin https://cursor.com/origin
- enriquto 2mo agomy favourites are sourcehut (that has excellent ci, and does not try to be a github clone) and codeberg (with slightly more straightforward migration path from github) [0] sr.ht [1] codeberg.org
- petcat 2mo agoDoes sourcehut still require patches via email instead of "pull requests"? That was the deal breaker for me last time I looked at it.
- enriquto 2mo ago> Does sourcehut still require patches via email I'd guess the technically correct answer to this question is "yes". But sourcehut has very good mailing list support, that is essentially equivalent to github pull requests. Still, I find the wording of your question a bit prejudiced... as if I asked "does github still require pull requests via a proprietary interface instead of just sending the patches?"
- 1f60c 2mo agoThe specific wording sounded a bit judgy to me as well, but I think it's a totally reasonable question. They're just asking about the capability of a product.
- Aeolun 2mo agoIt is prejudiced. If you like sending patches over email more power to you, but there’s a reason 99% of the world’s devs does not follow that workflow.
- internetter 2mo ago> but there’s a reason 99% of the world’s devs does not follow that workflow. Is there?
- 2mo ago
- AndrewKemendo 2mo agoI’ve been happy self hosting gitea https://about.gitea.com/ https://about.gitea.com/
- techknowlogick 2mo agoWoo! Thanks for the shoutout. I'm one of the project leads of Gitea, and if you ever run into any issues please feel free to hop into our chat:)
- AndrewKemendo 2mo agoAwesome It’s my go to now for all my private projects
- anticensor 2mo agoIf you accept a non-Git VCS, Pijul Nest.
- HeadOfProbing 2mo agoWhat are people using as alternatives for GitHub Actions specifically these days?
- bdcravens 2mo agoClassic CI vendors like Semaphore, Circle, etc are options.
- maratc 2mo agoI feel like something is missing from your list of "classic CI vendors" but can't exactly jput my jfinger on jit.
- thewisenerd 2mo agoare we referring to jenkins here perhaps?
- bdcravens 2mo agoI think of Jenkins as a project, not a vendor. (if you're looking for alternatives to Github, I'd assume it being a managed solution is a requirement)
- maratc 2mo agoYet half of the recommendations here are self-hosted this and self-hosted that.
- Bnjoroge 2mo agoHopefully a good spot to plug my own project, preloop, which is a drop-in replacement of Github actions(both the runners and control plane) that runs locally or self-hosted in isoalted microvms, and supports debug-on-failure. You can also push to the server, run CI and then optionally create a draft PR. Not quite production-ready yet(for the self-hosted part), but the local part works well. We implement the official runner protocol 100% unlike act/gitea/forgejo, so your workflows are more likely to work out of the box with preloop(forgejo has the closest compatibility with Github Actions though so it's a good off-Github option) and we use microvms so no DinD issues. I'm working on getting the official runner vm image up to reduce any environment incompatibilities. Feel free to try it out: https://github.com/preloopdev/preloop https://github.com/preloopdev/preloop
- CodeAndCuffs 2mo agoIf an org is heavily invested in GitHub Actions and GitHub App integrations, is self-hosting GitHub enterprise the only practical option?
- jdub 2mo agoBuildkite has built a GitHub Actions adapter... a good first step out of the GitHub Actions supply chain attack trap.
- woodrowbarlow 2mo agono; gitea and foregjo both support actions-style CI/CD and both serve mostly GH-compatible APIs and have GH-style apps. it's not 100% compatible (forgejo is a little more compatible than gitea [^1]), but many of your workflows might "just work" without even renaming the .github folder. ^1: in my recent experience, for my particular use cases
- techknowlogick 2mo agoI'm one of the project leads of Gitea and we've put a ton of work into Gitea Actions, I'd be interested in any compatibility gaps that you've run into.
- woodrowbarlow 2mo agooh hello, thank you for your work on an excellent product! one small difference i ran into last weekend is that foregjo forwards the FORGEJO_TOKEN in the environment to composite actions so that they don't need to have a required "token" input.
- Bnjoroge 2mo agomind trying https://github.com/preloopdev/preloop https://github.com/preloopdev/preloop? We follow the official runner protocol 100% so we should hopefully have more workflow-compat.we also run in cross-platform microvms, not docker containers.
- Bnjoroge 2mo ago
- beanjuiceII 2mo agoi use it quite often and it has not really been 'consistently down'
- artooro 2mo agoI'm mostly using GitLab right now, both self-hosted and their hosted platform. But am curious about Cursor Origin and certainly plan to try that out when it's available.
- n4pw01f 2mo agoSelf hosted GitLab has been good to me forever and has scaled and has a controllable attack surface as long as you keep on top of it Newer app is moving to Google Cloud Secure Source Manager (because we are on Google Cloud and using backbone auth so it made more sense and less involved to manage)
- BaudouinVH 2mo agosome european alternatives : https://european-alternatives.eu/alternative-to/github https://european-alternatives.eu/alternative-to/github
- vehemenz 2mo agoMy org's GitHub Enterprise never goes down. The feature set is almost the same, though it lags a few months behind. At least you don't have to learn anything new.
- jtokoph 2mo agoMy previous org’s GHE went down all the time. It couldn’t handle the CI and automation tooling hitting it as often as an org of our size needed it to. So I can totally see cloud not being able to handle the new AI scale
- herpdyderp 2mo agoI'm assuming you mean Enterprise Server (non-cloud), because my GitHub Enterprise Cloud is down right now.
- epiccoleman 2mo agoI've been a Gitlab fan for a long time[0]. I typically default to GitHub for my repo slop[1], but if I'm doing something serious I put it in Gitlab. I like their CI setup better than GitHub and there's also self-host options if any of those "serious" projects ever needs that. Also back in the day, you needed a paid account to make private repos on GitHub, but Gitlab made them free. Anyway I haven't heard anyone complaining about Gitlab going down constantly, maybe just a function of not being the default slop-forge in the AI era, but still, they've been a long time friend to my constant hackery. Also, Microsoft sucks. [0]: over the years the UI has gotten a good bit more cluttered and annoying, so there's probably slicker stuff out there. But it's fine. [1]: some of this is definitely vibe-coded LLM-vomit but I mean a more general type of slop in this case - random throwaway code, half baked ideas, etc.
- Helmut10001 2mo agoYes! And for those complaining that gitlab CE selfhosted is resource hungry: It can be tuned to only use 2 GB memory in total and run perfectly fine for a single developer or limited concurrency. Gitlab CI is awesome.
- KaiserPro 2mo agoI've used github for ~12 years, and it was fine for single repos, but it sucked _hard_ for any kind of organisation. It also sucked really hard for CI. I joined a company that was using hosted gitlab. I really liked it, apart from it had the same uptime as github has now. Features wise its about the same as github now, apart from organising repos is far simpler. Its not a flat list in an org, you can have sub teams in an org with thier repos neatly owned. However the security story around them is not great, so I'm not really sure that I'd want to host a public instance of gitlab.
- sneak 2mo agoI self host Gitea and have been supremely happy with it.
- ChrisArchitect 2mo agoRecently: GitHub has alternatives, but no replacement https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49135365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49135365 Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48842611 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48842611
- malindhamsara 2mo ago[dead]
- BaudouinVH 2mo agoIronically hosted on Github Gogs is a self-hosted forge : https://github.com/gogs/gogs https://github.com/gogs/gogs
- beoutdoors 2mo agoMy org uses a self-hosted instance of RhodeCode Enterprise. It's not as feature rich as GitHub, but it's worked well for us.
- plqbfbv 2mo agoTo all of those proposing self-hosted GitLab: we did it for 6+ years in my company, and it's not always a smooth sailing. We had our own runners and we made it auto-upgrade across docker images daily before business start. It mostly worked really well, except those few times were a Docker upgrade had to be rolled back, or that one time the bundled pg_shared_buffers was set at 1MB by default, making schema upgrades impossible for bigger instances, or a version major would break pipeline expectations forcing to upgrade 200+ repos at a time (we pinned to major afterwards). Lately I was also receiving an almost weekly "critical patch" newsletter due to critical/high vulnerabilities, which I can only imagine are due to LLM running over the code and identifying bugs. That said, I wish we hadn't migrated to GH, our self-hosted instance had WAY less downtime despite being perhaps a bit slower (mgmt saving money) and required a bit more toil: GH is nowhere near Enterprise-ready and it feels a downgrade across the board. GL has better access granularity, better docs, better integrations, and you can clearly see the UI received a lot of attention (although it does take 10m with a new account to pin the proper items in the maze of sub-menus that is the sidebar). You can also look at the code and help out if needed, and/or simply provide a patched version to your image via a docker mount. If you're really looking at self-hosting GitLab for a smallish team (up to 50-100 ppl), prepare at the very least a 16GB machine (best 32GB) with 4 cores and a decent SSD, and at least a small team (1-3 people) that can maintain it properly or jump at it at any moment. For runners, a small k3s cluster is ideal to make use of all the resources you can throw at it without worrying about managing the runner state/configuration.
- codexb 2mo agoYeah, it's mind blowing to me that GH still doesn't have a branch viewer in each repo.
- dawogfather 2mo ago[dead]
- inanothertime 2mo agoSetting up custom GitLab runners can be cumbersome in the beginning! We faced that multiple times with various customer projects for which we were using GitLab.com managed repos. That's why my colleague and I recently built a "GitLab Runners as a Service" [0] -- simply use your self-managed GitLab or GitLab.com account to login, adding pipeline runners is a 1-click operation! Under the hood we provision a Hetzner machine for you runners and automatically connect your GitLab group or project to it. Happy to hear your feedback! [0] https://rocketrunner.io/ https://rocketrunner.io/
- rvz 2mo agoIt is time to switch to self-hostable alternatives. It made sense 6 years ago as I said before [0], today it makes even more sense to self host with GitLab, Gitea or Forgejo. ...Or we can repeat the same issues again with Cursor Origin [1]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406 [1] https://cursor.com/origin https://cursor.com/origin
- madebywelch 2mo agoI moved to gitea + ec2 spot for actions w/ mirroring to GH for the time being.
- bfrog 2mo agoradicle.xyz to avoid centralization again
- iamnothere 2mo agoDisappointed to see only one mention of this. With Radicle you can continue to work locally with all issues etc intact, even if your “main” host is down. You can also sync through other hosts in the network.
- ukd1 2mo agoI've used gitlab and gitea; gitea is faster, and easier to manage and does everything I actually need though, is less feature complete.
- techknowlogick 2mo agoI'm one of the project leads of Gitea. I'd be interested in knowing which features you are missing from Gitea compared to Gitlab? We are doing some backlog grooming right now, and input is very appreciated:)
- henryfjordan 2mo agoNot who you asked, but I was going to say Actions or CI/CD from when I tried out Gitea a few years ago (back when running a Jenkins instance was more normal) but looks like Gitea supports that kind of workflow now: https://about.gitea.com/products/runner/ https://about.gitea.com/products/runner/
- rhdunn 2mo agoTwo of the big issues I had were around the user/repository forced structure. That works to some extent when you have multiple users with a small number of repositories. But for my personal projects I wanted more control over the structure and grouping. I worked around it to some extent by having an organisation per category, but that doesn't work at scale. For example, you can't group Text-to-Speech projects around the different libraries (coqui-ai, Qwen3, parler, etc.), or language tooling installation scripts by programming language. -- Those have a group/subgroup/repository style structure. The other related feature is having organisation or group-level issues and corresponding tracking features. Gitolite doesn't impose/enforce a structure on the user. GitWeb/CGit have a free-form category (e.g. "lang/python") that the project can be assigned to. That works, but I'd like it to support multiple tags/labels for that.
- dima55 2mo agoI want org-mode markup support for the wikis and readmes. Github supports this, and gitlab sorta does. You should hook up pandoc to it, and support everything it can handle.
- Pxtl 2mo agoA big thing with Github its the unified functionality across most of the OSS world - that we can search across all projects, leverage pipeline actions from other projects, and easily have a single dashboard for our own contributions and interests across all projects. I'd hate to see a move to forge balkanization lose this functionality. But this would not be heavyweight data to federate. So are there any forges with a good story for federation?
- dboreham 2mo agoThere was some work to address this issue with federation in Gitea, but I haven't kept up with how well that went. Our practical solution was to just mirror our Gitea repos into GitHub. That way they're discoverable, releases can be downloaded, and so on. Not a perfect solution because users get confused as to why they can't open issues, etc.
- Pxtl 2mo agoThat would be good for following, but I'd worry about contributions. Single-sign-on would help but if you're going to ask the user to create a new username+password to log a bug you're not going to get bugs from anybody except your most hardcore users. Also, unified dashboards/notifications are so useful (even though Github's notification UI is a bit mediocre, imho).
- techknowlogick 2mo agoI was one of the members who was a part of the initial grant for federation in Gitea, but sadly due to illness and other similar neither I nor my teammate were able to work on the grant (so no funding ended up being released), however the work we did start was completed, and we have continued to work on foundations since. Since spam/moderation/limitations are so significant we are focused on that portion first, since we don't want to open up another vector for it without having at least the minimum of protections in place. We have also been extremely fortunate to have experienced developers who do work on existing federated software share so much of their time, expertise, and experiences with us to help shape our work.
- 2mo ago
- gritzko 2mo agoI strongly disagree with the assumption that GitHub's alternative is another centralized forge. Git itself is perfectly decentralized, as was the original Linux kernel development process. How people managed to put all their eggs in one intermittently available service is beyond me. Moving the eggs into another bucket is not a solution (like Microsoft is short of servers). The SPoF is the problem. There are plumbing, porcelain and "github" layers. The "github" part has to be decentralized as well. Then, using a particular forge will be a choice of convenience, not necessity. https://replicated.live/blog/crdt https://replicated.live/blog/crdt
- anon7000 2mo agoOh, it’s really simple why this happened: 1. People do not like email-based patch processes. 2. GitHub made everything dead simple, and free. Lots of Open Source projects have flourished because GitHub is both easy to use and makes collaboration across repository painless. 3. Very few people actually care about decentralization. As long as you have a full copy of your repo on your own machines as well as GH, it’s hard to argue you’re gaining anything with decentralization. 4. Most people also don’t want to self host a git server.
- stephenway 2mo ago[dead]
- gritzko 2mo agoWhy use e-mail? That was 20 years ago. I developed my own local setup that is like GitHub for me and agents, see the link. Everything is a repo, may pull and push tickets, docs, everything. That was not a major effort, unless you count 20 years of experience. https://replicated.live/blog/crdt https://replicated.live/blog/crdt https://replicated.live/blog/link https://replicated.live/blog/link
- rsyring 2mo ago> How people managed to put all their eggs in one intermittently available service is beyond me. It's beyond me how people on HN can be ignorant to why GitHub gained so much market share. It's because for most dev teams, the things they add to the easily decentralized git core is *very valuable.* Arguing it's not valuable or ignoring that value doesn't help anyone. If decentralized is really going to win, then you have to have the features and DevX to match the basics GitHub provides. Because that's what people need/want. And not just the candy-ass-not-as-good-as-the-kernel-devs devs. Lots of very talented people and very well engineered projects use GitHub because it's better for what they need. Even with all the outages, people are still there. If it was so easy to move away, people would. The fact that they aren't says something important. Please consider not ignoring it.
- slackfan 2mo agoWe're moving over to self-hosted forgejo. Interface is roughly similar, featureset is roughly similar enough.
- axegon_ 2mo agoI migrated everything to codeberg several months ago (and created an annual donation schedule). I was never a big fan of github but what ultimately pushed me to ditch it was the way github was shoving copilot/chatgpt in my face without me ever asking. Codeberg has a clear stance on that and it's a stance I can totally get behind. In addition I spun up forgejo at a server at home for very critical stuff and it's awesome.
- bogwog 2mo agoCodeberg for open source and Forgejo for private (and slop, if you're into that kind of thing) is what winners do
- axegon_ 2mo agoI'm not into that kind of stuff honestly: in my case Forgejo is for stuff I don't feel comfortable with leaving the boundaries of my apartment.
- Anon1096 2mo agoNote: if your reason for switching is purely uptime, you will be sorely disappointed with codeberg Their own site reports the 2 week uptime at 1 nine https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg and I suspect if you use the (really terrible) across-all-product-offerings uptime methodology that people love to post for github it would be a 0 nines overall service.
- axegon_ 2mo agoThe reason for switching was shoving all the slop down my throat, even when just browsing. There are a couple of things I have published and a handful of others I plan on open sourcing some day so for the purpose, codeberg does a brilliant job. For work - meh i'm in a corporate environment running internal repositories on company servers so that's less of an issue still.
- VCFundedGenYer 2mo agoThe link you provided has shown a nearly perfect uptime. Your statement doesn't reflect the proof. Personally I have never had a single issue with Codeberg's uptime. Are you trying to argue that GitHub's is better for some reason (when it objectively is not)?
- sssilver 2mo agoIf only there was a convention for storing PRs and issues and wiki inside the repository itself, similar to how Fossil[1] does it. Then all the GitHubs and Gitlabs of this world would be limited to just providing UI and would be unable to hold our data hostage by design. [1] https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
- rwl 2mo agoI started using fossil recently and have been quite pleased with this aspect of it. I miss a few things from the git world (mostly magit and its magical ability to stage individual hunks of a diff) and there are a few rough edges, but I totally agree that having a wiki and issue tracking inside the repository makes so much sense. fossil‘s simplicity is a breath of fresh air for anyone who has to use git from a CLI. Well worth a try for anyone on the fence.
- sssilver 2mo agoThe workflow is paradigmically different, and that may throw many people off. There's no rebase, on principle. Branch names are permanent attributes of commits. Even abandoned branches remain visible forever. Code review is post-hoc. People who are extremely accustomed to Git workflows may find the paradigm alienating.
- rwl 2mo agoYep, it’s not for everyone, and their docs are pretty clear about that. OTOH those same docs contain a variety of arguments that git isn’t really designed for everyone either and that fossil might be a better fit for projects that have just one or a handful of developers, which AFAIK is the vast majority of projects on Github. My experience is that it is certainly an adjustment but the docs are good at explaining (and justifying) the differences, and the built-in features are very useful, especially for anyone looking to reduce their dependence on a centralized host that’s become unreliable.
- zhynn 2mo ago
- zdgeier 2mo agoI’m building a non-git alternative https://oak.space https://oak.space Would love for anyone to check it out!
- pwython 2mo agoVery interesting, I missed your original post[0], will definitely look into it further. What's new since you've posted? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48631726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48631726
- zdgeier 2mo agoWe've added some things like CI, Windows support, and starting some work on path-based permissioning for monorepos. These are still in the early stages so not documented that great yet and need to be tested a little bit more. Should have more updates in the next couple weeks.
- wejick 2mo agoWhat part of github that's so sticky? For me it's action and PR history.
- lnenad 2mo agoI'm running gitea successfully with very little resources.
- techknowlogick 2mo agoThat's great to hear! I'm one of the project leads of Gitea, and if you ever run into any issues please feel free to hop into our chatroom:)
- lnenad 2mo agoYou've built a great piece of software, thank you!
- ryuuseijin 2mo agoForgejo is great to self host. I have an easy to use template for setting it up on fly.io with backups here: https://forgejo-fly.fly.dev/forgejo-admin/forgejo-fly https://forgejo-fly.fly.dev/forgejo-admin/forgejo-fly
- jm4 2mo agoI self host Forgejo on a cheap VPS with hourly borg backups to rsync.net. It's a great system and seems comparable to github, although I'm not a heavy user of actions on either platform. I do use the container registry though. It was a smooth transition and easy to install. I used the docker installation method. Forgejo is great if you don't mind hosting yourself.
- melezhik 2mo agoYou may consider dsci as its ci is baked in and it uses general programming languages directly as the first class citizens
- rambojohnson 2mo agohow has nobody mentioned https://codeberg.org https://codeberg.org ? it gives you the obvious gitHub alternative: open-source, community-owned, privacy-respecting, non-corporate, and not built around turning your development workflow into a Microsoft-owned platform.
- dreamcompiler 2mo agoAll of that is good except if you also have a lot of private repos at GH, you cannot move them to Codeberg.
- ivan_gammel 2mo agoI moved recently to Gitoro with private projects, but do not have any meaningful opinion about it yet. It works for me, it’s fast, nothing to complain about. Just mentioning it here as EU-hosted alternative. https://gitoro.com/ https://gitoro.com/
- bdlowery 2mo agouse codeberg if you're ok with never using ai in any of your projects. Any AI use and your repo is banned. - https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-llms.html https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...
- timetraveller26 2mo agoFor CI/CD woodpecker has been working for us really well https://woodpecker-ci.org/ https://woodpecker-ci.org/
- Healer_0 2mo ago[flagged]
- bigstrat2003 2mo agoWhatever you do, you should self-host it. Then you aren't going to be at the mercy of some third party when they start to get hammered by vibe coders doing an insane amount of traffic. Forgejo is a great option if you want something git-based. I'm personally very partial to Fossil, it works well and is dead easy to set up.
- lluisantoni 2mo agoNot sure if someone mentioned it already but I also used bitbucket in the past and found it very easy to use with a similar offering as github.
- guywithahat 2mo agoI really liked bitbucket, it's my favorite git management system I've used for real production work and it allows for self hosting. Self hosting is also way faster than gitlab from what I remember
- emeraldlinex 2mo agoBitbucket was the perfect alternative. I used it back in the day when they were the only ones who offered free private repos. Ahead of their time. GH beat them on UI/UX and the PR workflow I think. Really nothing more than having a better ~$120k Product Designer working there. Kinda funny what actually makes people stick with 1 choice over another. Very often it’s just having better UI/UX, or offering something useful for free.
- Grombobulous 2mo agoIt’s interesting how under the radar Bitbucket is these days. I use it at work alongside GitHub (patchwork of merged companies). There are random little things I like about it better than GitHub, especially in an enterprise setting. And it has never gone down in my entire tenure at this company, while GitHub is like a weekly outage nightmare these days. Atlassian is doing a whole lot of strange and desperate stuff lately including some pretty insane UI changes in Jira and their other products, but Bitbucket seems like it’s been neglected the exact right amount for it to be a pretty decent choice.
- ALLTaken 2mo agoI like bitbucket too, it's been really awesome and clean. No idea why everyone favored GitHub, but I had to have accounts on both for university and work
- 2mo ago
- thangalin 2mo agohttps://repo.autonoma.ca/treetrek https://repo.autonoma.ca/treetrek I self-host using my own read-only, FOSS, pure PHP Git repository reader for personal projects.
- fosterfriends 2mo agohttps://cursor.com/origin https://cursor.com/origin
- icy 2mo agohttps://tangled.org https://tangled.org! Founder/CEO here. We're a new forge building things from the ground up, and are fully federated -- you can host your git repos on your own infra, along with the CI runners. We've also got a pretty neat set of features (if I may say so myself): stacked PRs, Nix-based CI (if you want it), and a fully open protocol (https://atproto.com https://atproto.com) to for you and your agents. Happy to answer any questions.
- silverlinex 2mo ago[flagged]
- icy 2mo agoIt's not crypto anything.
- silverlinex 2mo ago[dead]
- paulhebert 2mo agoThis looks pretty cool. I like the idea of a federated option What’s the monetization plan? My biggest concern would be using this and it losing support in a few years
- eximius 2mo agoI think the main thing I'm waiting for in the atproto space, for _most_ applications, is private data solutions. And the recent RFC on private data spaces (I forget the terminology) is a start, but has a ways to go.
- ch71r22 2mo agoYeah I would like to try Tangled if I can set it up in a completely private configuration
- 2mo ago
- dxbhack 2mo agodon’t switch reactively, but use the outages as a trigger to evaluate alternatives and make sure a GitHub outage doesn’t stop critical work.
- AtlasBarfed 2mo agoI'd like a self-hosted primary option as the source code repository, but I'd like to mirror the code in one of the usual external options, anyone done anything like that?
- 1saadcodes 2mo ago[dead]
- r0b05 2mo agoForgejo/Gitea is lightweight and easy to setup.
- matheusmoreira 2mo agoGitHub Sponsors. It's a nice way to for free and open source developers to earn some money. Which GitHub alternatives have anything like it?
- rhdunn 2mo agoIt depends on what you are after? 1. Do you want something that works and feels like GitHub? -- Forgejo and Gitea are good for this. 2. Do you want a place to host git repositories with minimal hassle? -- GitLab, CodeBerg, and others are available. 3. Do you have your own hosting infrastructure? You could use gitolite and CGit/GitWeb on that hosting platform or local hardware. 4. Do you just want to host repositories? -- Gitolite can be used to help with SSH/auth/repository creation, and CGit or GitWeb for the frontend. 5. Do you need something like GitHub Actions? -- GitLab, Forgejo, and Gitea offer CI, or use external CI infrastructure. 6. Do you need issue tracking and management? -- GitLab, Forgejo, and Gitea provide these. There are alternatives from Jira to Kanban (including Trello) to Markdown (Obsidian and others) and more.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- andrewpolidori 2mo agofor local Canadian based workflows that want sovereignty, I recommend https://about.worktree.ca https://about.worktree.ca
- CIARobotFish 2mo agoI'll second Worktree. I'm US based and have been using it for over a year. Very, very happy with their service.
- lowbloodsugar 2mo agoDisappointed https://aboot.worktree.ca/ https://aboot.worktree.ca/ doesn’t work.
- __turbobrew__ 2mo agoNote, currently worktree is just wrapping OVH as their “sovereign cloud”: https://docs.worktree.ca/sovereignty/ https://docs.worktree.ca/sovereignty/ I was wondering when reading their sovereignty docs why I wouldn’t just use OVH as it is a French company instead of a USA based company, and lo and behold they are just reselling OVH. I have used OVH personally and it has pretty good prices, but over aggressive DoS protection. Some of my workloads were shut down because OVH internal tools decided that what I was doing must have been a DoS. As a Canadian I welcome a Canadian owned cloud provider, but it is a huge endeavour to build that platform up from scratch. It does seem kind of weird that they are building both a CI system and a cloud, seems like they should pick one.
- __turbobrew__ 2mo agoAlso they are using a home baked S3 compatible storage system and longhorn for block storage: https://docs.worktree.ca/updates/post-mortems/2026-07-20 https://docs.worktree.ca/updates/post-mortems/2026-07-20 I haven’t the slightest clue why they didn’t use rook/ceph (they run on k8s) for this which not only is a very reliable block storage system, but also offers a S3 compatible API, and is proven at other cloud providers like Digital Ocean. I wish them the best but there is no way I would put my data into there.
- fortran77 2mo agoI loved the simplicity of Amazon CodeCommit. Unfortunately, Amazon decided to deprecate it, no new provisionion but existing accounts could remain. I'd love it if someone else offered a similar product.
- toolchunks 2mo ago[flagged]
- VaibhavKalra 2mo agoI guess we need a simpler alterntive to github
- hum3hum3 2mo agoLike others I migrated from github to codeberg. But since lots of my projects are coauthored with Claude I moved to self hosting Forgejo on a small Hetzner instance which also does some static hosting. So far working well. I think some cross platforms stars and search would be good.
- zuzululu 2mo agoI want to know what the best guide is for running your code repo at homelab type of setup? proxmox? what hardware to buy? i dont wanna get too crazy i just dont trust github with my code anymore
- melezhik 2mo agoTry dsci / it’s super simple
- grommz 2mo agoHas anyone tried Tencent CNB? It offers generous free quotas. https://cnb.build https://cnb.build
- nusl 2mo agoAnything with Tencent on it is a no for me.
- ALLTaken 2mo agoWhy, would you please share? For me it's usually a green-flag, since it automatically means they optimized for high-scalability first, as their userbase is gargantuous!
- guywithahat 2mo agoBecause China is a terrifying country with no real notion of human rights. Basically all Chinese companies (including Tencent) work closely with the government and do what they want under threat of arrest. There’s no way I’m uploading my data to China where their government can get at it whenever they want.
- kamikazechaser 2mo agoI have been hosting gitea for our small org (docker + sqlite) for close to 5 years now. ~50+ repos, some large. All upgrades, including major changes, have been as easy as just changing the tag and reloading the container.
- 1970-01-01 2mo agoI don't want to ignite an argument, but this feels like Linux v Windows. You should absolutely switch because you hate dealing with it, but the less-popular choice is going to be less popular everywhere. Your next job will very, very likely not care about your personal hatred and will simply force you back into the default, popular choice. It is sometimes best to stick with what (mostly) works for everyone unless you want to go down the path of learning another tool.
- 64d032fe 2mo agoWhat is there to learn? It uses Git. What you think it feels like, it is not.
- tyromaniac 2mo agoHonestly a lot of the complaints about migration feel to me like the result of poor management of actions etc. If your CI etc is so inextricably tied to github you were never doing it correctly
- mdkaifansari04 2mo ago[dead]
- tomasreimers 2mo agoCursor just launched Origin, a Github alternative: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49334209 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49334209
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- emeraldlinex 2mo agoGitHub is like World of Warcraft, in that you can’t kill it with another GitHub.
- VCFundedGenYer 2mo agoI moved to Codeberg months ago in response to GitHub's unreliability, poor moderation and random/illegitimate takedowns, and overuse of AI. Have never regretted the switch + I love the no AI policy.
- tmvnty 2mo agoMaybe the big cloud’s git solutions? Not to say the are good alternatives, but for teams already on the clouds, they could be a easier migration with somewhat feature complete, uptime, security promises that execs are looking for. At work, we have repos on GitHub and Azure DevOps. Today, GitHub went down, but our repos (including PRs, CIs) worked as normal on Azure DevOps
- jonstaab 2mo agoIf you want to try something a little bit more off the beaten path, https://gitworkshop.dev/ https://gitworkshop.dev/ is a code forge built on nostr
- TabTwo 2mo agooh, thats an awesome idea!
- versecafe 2mo agohttps://git.cafe https://git.cafe if you want a team focused entirely on building a better forge experience rather than a github clone and don't want to deal with hosting yourself (and yes jj support is built in)
- Magicrafter13 2mo agoMy setup is a self hosted GitLab. From there, in most of my repos I setup repo mirroring (basically it just does its own SSH-based git push whenever I push commits to it) to GitHub, GitLab, and Codeberg. All of these are free (if you ignore electricity cost of hosting your own git server), and each one is a backup of sorts. I don't necessarily recommend starting with GitLab though unless you want advanced CI capabilities, but you're already used to GitHub so you should consider self hosted gitea, which uses the same Actions syntax and even has some interoperability with its action modules I think. But yeah, my recommendation is just to push to as many (free) git hosts as you can. Why not take advantage of free code storage if it's available. Plus if any one host goes down you can still retrieve your code from the others.
- srfrog 2mo agoAWS CodeCommit + CodeBuild. All day long.
- delf 2mo agoCreator of GitSocial here: it's a Go binary CLI/TUI that lets you store all your issues, PRs, etc. in the git itself and self-host on any S3-compatible bucket: https://gitsocial.org/ https://gitsocial.org/. On more detailed level, it allows forgeless issue management, cross-forge PRs, git-native discussions, and much more. It has not dependencies, just git itself. Happy to answer any questions!
- marcfrommelious 2mo ago[dead]
- malaproping 2mo agoBranchyard launching soon! https://branchyard.com/ https://branchyard.com/ Add your name to the waitlist. A complete DevSecOps platform: Git forge, CICD pipelines, Private Registry, Issues/Planning, self-hosted or cloud. Our team consists of long-time members from GitLab and DataRobot. We are looking for design partners: ceo@branchyard.com
- Gronnfalk 2mo agoTry Gitlab, Bitbucket, or Codeberg.
- keithnz 2mo agoto your actual question, no, it really doesn't make sense. The problem is you are saying it is down consistently.... and it's not. You can switch if you want, but from my observations, it's not really that often, and those that do switch make a bunch of compromises when they do. I'd only consider it once you actually measure the impact to your business. Based on actual data and not feelings, then consider whether it is worth it given all the costs of switching. We use it all the time and at most, may have had 30 minutes where we were stuck.
- hinkley 2mo agoI'm screwed because I am part of an ecosystem that all lives in github. I'm not happy about the fact that GH doesn't show my when new issues or PRs are filed against projects I maintain despite the notification settings implying I should be getting notifications, but at least it's not Atlassian. I was working on major architecture shifts for a couple of libraries, to fix early mistakes or improve performance. I noticed that of them used a tool A that was dead, built on another tool B that was even deader. I found someone who was building a new B, and I made a new A and offered to swap in it on the one project. That went well, so then I integrated it to the other projects I was contributing to. Which I'm now also a maintainer on. And also the 'new B', because I pushed the intent of his library farther than he had been thinking about, contributing about 20% of the public facing API and about 5% of the internals. One of those projects is a monster, of which I'm just on a subproject. I'd never be able to get them all to move off. And any mix of GitHub and ^GitHub results in the amount of busy work I have to do to keep on top of issues and PRs more than doubles. And that's how the getcha.
- timedude 2mo agoTry Fossil https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
- shofetim 2mo agoIf you are frustrated with Github being down again, and just want an alternative, the other options listed are better fits. If you have the time to look at doing more than that, then check out fossil https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki - It isn't git - Works best with smaller teams - You need to be ok self hosting (single binary, easy to do) The first point is really the killer. It is revision control, it is as good as git (maybe better), but it is different. Git = branches are easy, was built to support Linux's lieutenant development model, and a massive, loosely connected team. Fossil = branches are intentionally hard, built to support a small, tight knit team (SQLite). Most teams I've been on are closer in size to SQLite than they are to Linux, but everyone already knows git at a gut deep level. YMMV.
- jm4 2mo agoFossil looks really cool. I like how it's all in one and includes the web interface. The only thing is it doesn't seem like anyone actually uses it outside of sqlite. I don't necessarily need to use the most popular thing out there, but some social proof is nice.
- shofetim 2mo agoIt is a small community. The forums are moderately active though: https://fossil-scm.org/forum/forum https://fossil-scm.org/forum/forum
- stefanos82 2mo agoThere's also a hosting service for fossil repos which does a really good job for a number of years now https://chiselapp.com/repositories/ https://chiselapp.com/repositories/
- robwayne 2mo agoI've sorta overlooked Fossil a lot (mostly because it's not git...), but just browsing some instances on chisel and the fossil homepage has me intrigued. If you'll entertain me for a moment... My dream "forge" would just be nice-looking frontend for displaying repos on the web, a public issue tracker (with per-issue permissions), a public way to submit issues, and essentially a single canonical root for repositories that users on the team work on. I don't want individual user repos or pages, organizations, or any social stuff. I definitely don't want open registration. It really looks like fossil is actually what I've always wanted. How limiting is the custom theme support? It looks like you can just straight up write your own HTML/CSS for everything. If I really want a custom design, will I be disappointed in the long run? Also, it looks like it follows that user model I want, where it's "repositories with users" instead of "users with repositories". Is that correct? And here I was trying to hype myself up to write my own git web frontend.
- ktosobcy 2mo agoI miss something like GitHub but - hosted in the EU - without "FOSS only" limitation like codeberg. I know I can self-host forgejo but would be nice to have something like forge.eu (even paid!)
- e-topy 2mo agoSourceHut is actually from Amsterdam, and has both unlisted and private repo visibility. It's also self hostable, but I'm on the $2 tier and damn is it good.
- ktosobcy 1mo agoEach time I end up on SourceHut I'm immediatelly put of… it's probably fine but the UI (for me) is just difficult to work with…
- TabTwo 2mo agoforgejo for hosting, woodpecker for CI/CD. Hopefully forgejo gets federation in the near future because öets face it, opening an issue on Github is easy because you have an user there but you wont get one on my private forgejo instance. Also, a tool like gh for forgejo would be nice. If you want to have an easy way to setup, have a look at https://yunohost.org/ https://yunohost.org/ that also offers lots of other nice stuff in its "app store" -> https://apps.yunohost.org/ https://apps.yunohost.org/
- tensorfoundry 2mo agothis is our stack too, we initially ran BuildKite but switched to Woodpecker for Forgeo. Coming from Github there's a few basic things that are missing in woodpekcer that may frustrate you but it's improving regularly.
- bryantnyc 2mo agohttps://github.com/facebook/sapling https://github.com/facebook/sapling Anyone outside of FB using it?
- bryantnyc 2mo agoThe former CEO of GitHub has launched a competitor: https://thenewstack.io/thomas-dohmke-interview-entire/ https://thenewstack.io/thomas-dohmke-interview-entire/ Anyone using it?
- rowbin 2mo agoCan recommend https://codefloe.com https://codefloe.com
- gdorsi 2mo agoFor my personal projects I use https://radicle.dev/ https://radicle.dev/
- throwitaway222 2mo agoI wonder how hard it would be to vibe code a super basic gitea/gitlab clone (or a very stripped down version) that's designed to just have basic authentication w/ssh, some basic main branch protections, simple code review, etc... and runners with some simple YAML language. I bet you could do it with like 10 prompts.
- bergie 2mo agoI'm nowadays hosting my projects on rngit (git over Reticulum). But also pushing a mirror to GitHub via a cronjob to increase visibility. https://reticulum.network/manual/git.html https://reticulum.network/manual/git.html I don't think moving to another forge is much of a solution, at most it is buying a bit of time. We've seen this happen with SourceForge, with Tigris, and now with GitHub.
- 0xbadcafebee 2mo agoI have a pretty bad taste in my mouth from GitHub, GitLab, Forgejo, Gitea, etc. They all attempt to hijack Git itself and become a monolith and single custom interface, rather than independent components that work around the Git repo. I want the Unix philosophy applied to Git and other functions. That way I'm not forced to switch the entire kitchen sink out when some single piece of functionality or hoster ends up breaking things.
- Nemo_bis 2mo agoSounds like the description of Radicle. :-) https://radicle.dev/guides/protocol#collaborative-objects https://radicle.dev/guides/protocol#collaborative-objects
- 0xbadcafebee 2mo agoThat's not really what I'm looking for. Radicle is trying to define specific functionality the system supports: a single protocol which combines multiple separate use cases into one standard. What I want is a system that doesn't define functionality. I want something protocol-less. The larger system design prescribes only loose i/o channels between components, so (for example) you know you can interrogate something Git-ish. But what language or protocol they speak, what functionality they contain, isn't prescribed by the design. This allows them to have any functionality. You might think I want something like microservices. But microservice interfaces are too prescriptive and not interoperable with other services. Everyone writes their own custom incompatible API for the same basic functionality. What's needed is something so simple, so loose, that people naturally copy the first one they see for their own implementation. Example: Pull Requests. They're basically just a git diff, that can be approved, blocked, rejected, and comments are attached to them. You could implement that a hundred different ways. But what's the simplest possible thing? It already exists: patches in e-mail. You e-mail a diff to a mailing list, people reply (comment) on pieces of the diff, and eventually somebody commits and merges some form of the diff and pushes it to their repo. You didn't really need a DAG, or objects, or CRDTs, or protocols. You already had everything you needed. So how to implement this, in a system with no protocols? Just feed e-mails into an app; the app reads the e-mails, it accesses a clone of a Git repo for operations, it sends e-mails out, and displays comments etc in a web interface of the diff. Next example: Issues. This one is pretty simple: use any ticketing system you want, the rest of the system has no idea. Reference an issue's URL in a comment or commit message with either the bare url, or markdown ([issue #123](uri://somehost/issuetracker/view?i=123)). Use OIDC to allow logins, or read-only for anonymous. Want to "copy" data from one system or component to another? Each system can do this differently, but if you make it simple enough, they'll all do the same thing. Simplest solution? For each service's HTTP endpoint (I'm just assuming they would all use HTTP to communicate, but don't have to), prefix the endpoint with "/zipmime", and the result is a ZIP file of MIME files (so "uri://somehost/issuetracker/view?i=123" becomes "uri://somehost/zipmime/issuetracker/view?i=123"). Now you can export any data from any service in a standard way that supports any kind and amount of content (because it's URI-based and HTTP-based, the service doesn't even have to support this natively! you can implement a reverse proxy and microservice to bolt the functionality on later). At no point in any of these designs are they dependent on other designs. They just "do what they do", and other designs naturally coalesce around simple standard methods.
- mococa 2mo agoMostly of recommendations only have linux runners, I need windows and macOS. Any recommendations?
- alestsurko 2mo agoIn my opinion the most underestimated git forge is radicle.
- stackghost 2mo agoWhat about a mailing list and `git format-patch`?
- nurdism 2mo agoselfhosting gitea has been a great experience for me, its open source
- sangtd 2mo agoif you want to work on personal projects and store personal data, use gitLab; if you’re working on open-source projects, use codeberg. codeberg is a nonprofit organization dedicated to open source, so their storage policies are quite strict. gitLab offers 10gb of storage with no restrictions, and their data policies are much better than gitgub’s if you want full control and to deploy on your own, consider forgejo for an experience similar to github actions. If you’re used to gitlab’s pipelines, set up your own private gitlab instance
- joeyguerra 2mo agoNot really. Is it stopping your work?
- Taikhoom10 2mo agoCurious to hear: does GitHub not have any switching costs to leave? Or is it the broader Microsoft ecosystem? Or a mix of both?
- small_scombrus 2mo agoGitHub Actions, GitHub Auth, any hard coded GitHub URLs you use, GitHub's nice REST API. They do have a bunch of value adds, it just depends on which you use
- Taikhoom10 2mo agoright so basically moving upmarket, upselling around a core idea.
- woodrowbarlow 2mo agogitea/forgejo both do an 80% job of covering these needs, ime. they have mostly-GH-compatible APIs.
- Taikhoom10 2mo agoare you a paying customer?
- neilbb 2mo ago[dead]
- Taikhoom10 2mo ago[flagged]
- prima-facie 2mo agoFor SaaS forges there's also upd.dev launched recently. For self-hosted forges: forgejo is great but also cgit is pretty good for exporting repos. With the recent GitHub fiasco I've split my repos across multiple forges. Git was always supposed to be decentralised so why store everything in one place?
- solid_fuel 2mo agoI set up Forgejo on my FreeBSD home server the other week, it's been working fantastically. All the features I need, snappy, easy to install. I think ultimately any company that goes this route will start benefiting from an IT team again though - instead of just pushing everything off to SAAS providers.
- iamkonstantin 2mo agoWe switched our entire product studio to a self hosted Forgejo https://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/ and honestly this has been one of our best decisions: it's fast, has a great API for bots and automations to use, just a Go project so we've been able to make some tweaks to the runner. Very easy to setup and admin
- icc97 2mo agoFrom when MS bought GitHub: https://github.com/ianchanning/awesome-github-alternatives https://github.com/ianchanning/awesome-github-alternatives
- cik 2mo agoI've had both self hosted GitHub (enterprise), and GitLab in the last year. It really deoends what you're trying to replace and how you structure the things you're hoping to replace. Also, the value of investing in your separation of concern or safety valve. To me, still, at a scale of 250 contributors (which we hit), Gitea solved all the problems. The fact that there's a command line tool (tea) that mostly works, means that it is beyond good enough for my use case, out of the box. It misses all sorts of things and depending on how important they are, you then invest in looking to close we they'll gap. That in turn creates its own maintenance and frustration costs. In other words, there's no one shot. There's a good enough depending on need.
- adityaathalye 2mo agoOld skool is best skool... There is wisdom in keeping these decoupled: - 1. your central code review (and hosting), which is the critical choke-point on team collaboration. versus - 2. the ever-expanding ick of testing, building, deploying it etc... because failure modes of software construction infra are concentrated here. --- 1. Code review (and hosting): Keep this in-house always. Use Gerrit if you care about code review. Code review workflow is the nub / hub of collaboration, and should never be blocked on anything else failing, including itself. Maintaining robust in-house code review infra. is work, yes, but it is quite manageable. Simple "single-box with full point-in-time snapshot recovery" designs will remain good for a long, long time... Think; workloads of teams of up to a few hundred programmers and bots, who would be pushing and pulling updates against multiple repositories at a time on a single, well-endowed, Gerrit box. 2. CI/CD: Use whatever works best economically. Be it one giant in-house box running Jenkins, or a clever way to use github and gitlab's job infra as fallbacks for each other. These systems fail often because pretty much all the ick of software construction is concentrated here. Be it simple test runners, or fancy end-to-end auto-deploy to rollback pipelines. The mind-numbing ick of software supply chain dependencies, test run jobs, build jobs, failures / retries, bursts of high contention (lots of people / bots needing their test runs passing NOW), pulling and pushing artefacts, and so forth. This is a true pain to manage, particularly in organisations that are laissez-faire about their software ecosystem ("best tool for the job" mentality etc.). And on a personal note... --- <begin rant> --- I strongly prefer to keep it all in-house. Proprietary software is oil - capital. Own it fully, no exceptions. This was true "back then", and it has become even more business-critical now, for obvious reasons. As if trusting enterprise chat SaaSes with all your company secrets wasn't bad enough. At least that has some contractual defensibility. Had. Had... Now? Something is deeply wrong with people who aren't completely spooked by the current fad of letting hyperscalers steal literally everyone's data to make content and code re-production autobots. Based on how those companies have behaved from the get-go, and factoring in the overwhelming pressure the LLM industry has created to "become the biggest, no matter what, because biggest wins"; their "terms of service" are as good as their high-flying CEO's mood on a given day. No thanks. Besides, it's only been a hot minute since I adjusted to that other fait acompli of 21st century computing. They who controleth thy hypervisor, controleth thy destiny. --- Ye Olde Graybeard Wisdom --- <end rant> --- (edit: fix formatting, typos)
- catab 2mo agoHi! (Full disclosure: I am the author of rocketgit project.) Check https://rocketgit.com https://rocketgit.com It is AGPLv3.
- mircerlancerous 2mo agoI've used GOGS for years (Go Git Service). https://gogs.io/getting-started/introduction https://gogs.io/getting-started/introduction
- xyst 2mo agoforgejo, self hosted. Dead simple to host, even have it integrated with my pocket id so it’s one less password I have to remember.
- kevin11111 2mo agoHi guys have you looked into gitlawb.com? Opensource, decentralized and agent friendly I just asked my agent to do a git push in seconds no human involve
- mavensum 2mo ago[flagged]
- zserge 2mo agoI'm building my own - https://git.zserge.com/fierj https://git.zserge.com/fierj - and for a few weeks it's hosting itself. Still working on patches workflow and CI, but it's quite usable already. I try to make it "minimally federated" - only threads (issues/discussions etc) are federated via ActivityPub, for PR there is old-school patches workflow, for CI just chroot and a shell script. A lightweight personal git forge in ~4KLOC. Can't say everyone should use it and can't recomment it, but building a personal forge is very realistic. Or you can run cgit as a frontend to your git remote on a server.
- superdisk 2mo agoMostly a toy, but I made https://dumbforge.dev https://dumbforge.dev which is intended for hosting public repos without setting up a daemon or forge at all.
- alexfortin 2mo agoMight not be the right move for everyone but I'm very happy to have invested some time and effort to setup my personal Forgejo instance. I've blogged about it too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48978707 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48978707
- nordcode 2mo agoOrigin by Cursor probably will be future Software.
- ismailperim 2mo ago[flagged]
- alanmarkz 2mo agoi don't think so. lots of cloud-providers still support github. atleast in my case i can't switch
- dalleh 2mo agoTry self-hosting Gitea with push mirror to GitLab or GitHub. Gitea is powerful and lightweight, and a push-mirror to another service is a plus as a backup location.
- fiatjaf 2mo agoTry https://gitgrasp.com/ https://gitgrasp.com/ for an open protocol approach that can't be shut down and uses normal HTTP git servers.
- maanufr 2mo agodunno how it works but Cursor just released its own alternative Origin and looks pretty good integrated to build agents and ship them quickly using one ecosystem, so will be worth it give it a chance
- zoobab 2mo agoGitTorrent
- jbec_x 2mo agoCodeberg seems like a good alternative and is already hosting loads of awesome stuff.
- libertas_quae_s 2mo agoWe have self-hosted GitLab running for https://omniline.app/ https://omniline.app/
- grim_io 2mo agoAs a whole? None. If you only need git hosting, do whatever wherever you want.
- dbrn 2mo ago[flagged]
- toolchunks 2mo ago[flagged]
- geekraver 2mo agoI am self-hosting with Gitea. Have action runners set up on my Windows PC and Mac (with a container for Linux). Works great.
- pbarros 2mo ago[flagged]
- Room10Mind 2mo ago[dead]
- ArturoNereu 2mo agoGive https://diversion.dev/ https://diversion.dev/ a try. You can even have bi-directional sync between GitHub and Diversion while you decide. Files of any size, centralized, and easy to use.
- n3ll1x93 2mo agoCursor released Origin, its git repository , full integrated with AI patterns.
- kokkis 2mo agoI got to know about https://opensats.org/projects/ngit https://opensats.org/projects/ngit when I worked at OpenSats as a writer for some short three months. Idk much about ngit though, so I can't vouch for it. Yet, some very fascinating nostr-based github stuff. There are others, too, but I can't remember them by name. With some light surfing you can see other implementations.
- MetroWind 2mo agoI just asked AI to write one for me and self-hosted it.
- hyenaportal 1mo agoAnyone tried Entire ? https://entire.io/ https://entire.io/
- tetek 1mo agohttps://sr.ht https://sr.ht
- sockstack 1mo agogitea