GitHub's Read-only git #233

NameLessGO commented 2024年10月17日 17:22:36 +02:00

Description

Clone Forgejo repos source code, commit history on GitHub's Forgejo Account to increase visibility, popularity, and donations

Pros:

• Visibility: Users will be able to follow and favorite Forgejo repos, which will make them stand out and possibly appear in GitHub Trending feed, thus increasing their popularity and adoption
• GitHub Sponsors program: Users will have another option to donate, which will lead to more funding

Cons:

• Terms of Service
• Content / Code will probably be used for AI training

Extra Discussion

• Pull Requests: Accept them, or deny and redirect to Forgejo
• Issues: Accept them, or deny and redirect to Forgejo
• Releases: Show them or no?
• Packages: Show them or no?
• Actions: Show them or no?

Example:

• Linux
• LibreOffice
• OpenBSD
• Alpine Linux

Docs

• https://docs.github.com/en/migrations/importing-source-code/using-github-importer/about-github-importer

## Description Clone Forgejo repos source code, commit history on [GitHub's Forgejo Account](https://github.com/forgejo) to increase visibility, popularity, and donations ## Pros: - Visibility: Users will be able to follow and favorite Forgejo repos, which will make them stand out and possibly appear in [GitHub Trending feed](https://github.com/trending), thus increasing their popularity and adoption - [GitHub Sponsors program](https://github.com/sponsors): Users will have another option to donate, which will lead to more funding ## Cons: - [Terms of Service](https://tosdr.org/en/service/297) - Content / Code will probably be used for AI training ## Extra Discussion - Pull Requests: Accept them, or deny and redirect to Forgejo - Issues: Accept them, or deny and redirect to Forgejo - [Releases](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/releases): Show them or no? - [Packages](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/packages): Show them or no? - [Actions](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/actions): Show them or no? ## Example: - [Linux](https://github.com/torvalds/linux) - [LibreOffice](https://github.com/LibreOffice) - [OpenBSD](https://github.com/openbsd) - [Alpine Linux](https://github.com/alpinelinux) ## Docs - https://docs.github.com/en/migrations/importing-source-code/using-github-importer/about-github-importer

Ghost commented 2024年10月17日 17:50:02 +02:00

I don't have a good argument against it and it doesn't sound like a bad proposal at core. I do dislike it though. I wish I had more concrete reason as to why.

I don't have a good argument against it and it doesn't sound like a bad proposal at core. I do dislike it though. I wish I had more concrete reason as to why.

fnetX commented 2024年10月17日 18:25:09 +02:00

@NameLessGO thank you for your proposal. I have very strong objections towards it though.

First, I don't think that visibility is Forgejo's primary issue. Mouth-to-mouth (or toot-to-toot) recommendations in real life and social media as well as Codeberg's popularity make most user accounts of the project. Considering that Forgejo has 1.7k stars on Codeberg, this is probably worth more than 10 times this amount on GitHub. I found this article an excellent read some time ago and share it from time to time. And I have seen numerous projects which even boosted their popularity by moving to Codeberg by a lot.

Having it an additional option will make people confused. Many organizations have mirrors. And people repeatedly request being able to contribute there, or they try to and get ignored. Since GitHub does not allow a way to disable pull requests, you will need to find a way to deal with them, se https://github.com/LibreOffice/core/pull/41 as an example. It will result in work for Forgejo contributors, with questionable gain.

Regarding GitHub sponsors: This program is an excellent vendor lock in mechanism, a good example to illustrate how useful they are for big platforms. Using GitHub sponsors, you are not only tied to GitHub on a technical level, making a migration hard. It will also bind you to the platform on a financial level, because you rely on them personally. You effectively cannot drop it again, because it will result in a loss of share. Assuming that it is at least a certain percentage, e.g. 20%, reducing your income by 20% will be a big issue. Setting up GitHub sponsors is a one-way ticket: Every contributor on GitHub sponsors is a missed opportunity to get the same person donate to you via a more libre channel such as Liberapay. Although you might indeed miss some potential income, it is probably worth to pay this price to make independent and informed decisions.

@NameLessGO thank you for your proposal. I have very strong objections towards it though. First, I don't think that visibility is Forgejo's primary issue. Mouth-to-mouth (or toot-to-toot) recommendations in real life and social media as well as Codeberg's popularity make most user accounts of the project. Considering that Forgejo has 1.7k stars on Codeberg, this is probably worth more than 10 times this amount on GitHub. I found [this article an excellent read](https://garrit.xyz/posts/2021-01-23-signal-to-noise) some time ago and share it from time to time. And I have seen numerous projects which even boosted their popularity by moving to Codeberg by a lot. Having it an additional option will make people confused. Many organizations have mirrors. And people repeatedly request being able to contribute there, or they try to and get ignored. Since GitHub does not allow a way to disable pull requests, you will need to find a way to deal with them, se https://github.com/LibreOffice/core/pull/41 as an example. It will result in work for Forgejo contributors, with questionable gain. Regarding GitHub sponsors: This program is an excellent vendor lock in mechanism, a good example to illustrate how useful they are for big platforms. Using GitHub sponsors, you are not only tied to GitHub on a technical level, making a migration hard. It will also bind you to the platform on a financial level, because you rely on them personally. You effectively cannot drop it again, because it will result in a loss of share. Assuming that it is at least a certain percentage, e.g. 20%, reducing your income by 20% will be a big issue. Setting up GitHub sponsors is a one-way ticket: Every contributor on GitHub sponsors is a missed opportunity to get the same person donate to you via a more libre channel such as Liberapay. Although you might indeed miss some potential income, it is probably worth to pay this price to make independent and informed decisions.

NameLessGO commented 2024年10月17日 18:40:54 +02:00

Great points, didn't know you couldn't disable Pull requests, and GitHub Sponsor lock in seems to be troublesome

Feel free to give final thoughts and close this issue

+1 Deny Proposal

Great points, didn't know you couldn't disable Pull requests, and GitHub Sponsor lock in seems to be troublesome Feel free to give final thoughts and close this issue +1 Deny Proposal