Considering to move from a selfhosted gitea to Github with flockingbird. Sourcecode, issues, wiki/documentation.

* Discoverability: We're just more visible on GH than on "some random website".
* Participation barrier: you probably have a GH account, but certainly no account yet on our instance.
* Defacto standard: external systems like CI, support etc all require github.

It feels a bit like giving in, but the benefits seem to outweigh the idealistic stance.

What do you think?


I considered @codeberg and , but that solves a problem we don't really have: the hosting part. We already have a gitea instance, it works and is maintained anyway.

Sourcehut has a CI setup, which we are still evaluating: our gitea needs work still to get a CI running.

Sourcehut or Codeberg might lower the participation barrier a little, but I presume that anyone on or also has a GH account, but not vice-versa.

@flockingbird GitLab has also a CI/CD setup and you can connect a account on a self hosted GitLab

@danslerush Thanks for the pointer!, where flockingbird is hosted, used to run on gitlab. But it was too much effort & costly to run (I say that as a Rails developer and -hoster - Gitlab is built on Rails).

Going so far that on average we needed 0.1 FTE (half a day a week) just to keep it running. That is fine for a project with several FTE to spare, but not whith our focus 100% on the product.

Hosted gitlab might work, though, but is that much better than "hosted github"?

@flockingbird @danslerush when exposure is your goal, then gitlab won't work for you. It still has massive SEO problems which will only be partly solved in the next upcoming versions.

You could consider having just a mirror on GitHub and maybe allow authentication through GitHub on your Gitea instance. On the other hand if you don't mind the dependence one can't deny that GitHub provides a creepy amount of features.

@sheogorath @danslerush The Features are, indeed, compelling.

Mostly features from third party tools, though. Even Open Source tools and projects have a "connect to github" but won't work with issues, PRs, wiki or other features on a gitlab instance.

I'm afraid we've dug our own hole here, as community. And locked ourselves into Github.

Yet, for flockingbird, our focus is our product and much less (the idealism of) the underlying infrastructure.

Still. It feels like "giving up".

@sheogorath In this case I get it but I'll already have bigger "exposure" on MS Linkedin than @flockingbird 😜 ... the point here I think is a balance between usability and having some mainteners.

Wanting to use MS GitHub for that has something "tasty" :troll:

I only pointed the CI/CD functionalities but you can add a layer on Gitea, like Jenkins or others />

But basically, it's Git everwywhere, you can mirroring ... or waiting for @forgefed 😜

@danslerush I have and had running on but it became too costly to maintain. Jenkins same: the TCO is just too high.

And nearly all (open source) hosted CI requires either github or gitlab and fails to run with a selfhosted Gitea.

So much for "Git - distributed source control" 😔

@flockingbird Yes I know, unfortunately, there is a big job to be done on this point 😥 I may repeating myself but GitLab remains a "less worse" solution in your goals

@danslerush I still have all the ansible playbooks to install & maintain that gitlab instance.

It was just so terribly resource hungry and therefore expensive (requiring a large VPS) and unstable that we moved to gitea.

Another reason was that gitea is much cleaner wrt its "client", the HTML. Making the SEO far, far better.

I guess migh prove a good middleground. Will investigate further. Thanks!

@flockingbird I have both, but yes I largely prefer my Gitea instance ... you're welcome ! 🖖

@flockingbird after Microsoft bought github, many people dropped their account or refuse to access it if they have one. The people using sourcehut or codeberg would much more likely be in that set.

As noted in the other thread, if discoverability is the concern, then following the Linux model might make sense (with pointers/direction to the official non-gh instance).

@flockingbird also, the people looking for a LinkedIn alternative will align with those avoiding github for the same Microsoft reason.


Just wanted to second what has already been outlined thrice:
If your target audience is people wanting a libre alternative to linkedin then they probably won't like to learn it's hosted on github (I know because I fit that description 😬)

Also, email contributions mean no account needed, and that's cool 👍


For reference, you don't need an account to participate in projects on #sourcehut
All you need is the ability to send and receive E-Mails, which is quit the selling point for me. @codeberg

@ck I like that idea, and I did not know about that feature.

Is that something admins have to toggle per repo? Because I've not encountered it yet.

E.g. to add an issue at I need to register at codeberg before being able to participate.

Which is quite understandable from codebergs' POV.

Yet it is another hurdle when we want participation to be as "frictionless" as possible. On GH, almost all potential participants already have an account, "sadly".

Nope. Just send a patch to the public mailing list of a project, that's it. Send an E-Mail to the public issue list, report an issue. No account necessary.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.