Sure, I know a lot of projects have been on GH since before MS bought it, but they’ve owned it for quite a while now, so we really should be seeing better migration out by now, no?

Codeberg is nonprofit which seems more in the spirit of the Linux ecosystem overall. GH is for-profit…

  • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
    81·
    1 day ago

    There was a lot of trepidation about this, but for the first few years they not only kept their promise about supporting FOSS, but actually made it better by allowing small private repos to get many of the services that were previously gated for open FOSS or paid repos.

    • They embraced! :D
    • They extended! :D
    • . . .aw, shit. :/

    I’ve only a basic understanding of using Git myself, but I think I’m gonna learn it with a self-hosted Forgejo for my Godot projects too.

    Then for the parts that don’t have feature parity, I won’t know what I’m missing, and I have no need for “iNdUsTrY sTaNdArD LeAdiNg oPtiMiZeD sYnErGyStiC wOrKfLoWs” or whatever hahaha.

    It does definitely present a conundrum if you want people to see your open source software though. Damn network effect. =\

    • BartyDeCanter@piefed.socialEnglish
      7·
      1 day ago

      The number one thing to remember about git is that you don’t need a full hosting service around it for basic functionality. If it’s just you, a single local repo will probably serve you just fine, maybe use a bare repo on your main machine or a Pi-level device if you like as a remote/backup. Just git init or git init --bare and you’re good to go. GitHub, Codeberg, Forgejo, and all the others exist to serve multi-contributor and/or public project-level needs.

      The number two thing to remember is that it is based around graph theory.

      • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
        2·
        19 hours ago

        That’s some really helpful advice, thank you! 😃 I actually didn’t know you could just make any local folder a repo like that.

        Would a Forgejo instance still be helpful if I wanted to have “one point of truth” between multiple machines even if I’m the only dev? I already use Syncthing, but for some reason I feel like there’d be a lot of sync conflicts and stuff.

        The other main reason for wanting to learn Git, of course, is because it’s otherwise more difficult to try out changes to scripts and experiment, without finding yourself lost in the weeds and forgetting what worked last.

        My current “version control” is “copy the entire project folder before you do anything major.” 😂

        • BartyDeCanter@piefed.socialEnglish
          2·
          10 hours ago

          If you just want one point of truth, the minimal version is to create a bare repo somewhere that you have ssh access to or your local machine. Then you can clone/pull/push from it.

          A bare repo is a special kind of repo meant for exactly this, but can be a bit confusing at first. A normal repo contains all of your current working files and a special .git directory that holds all the files/blobs/history that git needs to work. A bare repo is just the .git as a top directory with bare=true in its config. So you can use it as a remote, but it never has a working set. They are usually named something like my_repo.git.

          Edit:

          Here’s a basic example for setting it all up in a fully local way:

          mkdir ~/bares  
git init --bare ~/bares/my_repo.git  
mkdir ~/code  
git clone ~/bares/my_repo.git ~/code/my_repo

          And then you have remotes as your main source of truth in ~/bares and your working copies in ~/code. If you want to access from another machine that has ssh access to the first, you can do:

          mkdir ~/code  
git clone user@host:~/bares/my_repo.git ~/code/my_repo

          And then use git pull/push to keep it all in sync. Don’t use Syncthing on a git repo, it eventually goes badly.