I dunno, some of these are a pretty big deal, in particular:
Gitea repeatedly makes choices that leave Gitea admins exposed to known vulnerabilities during extended periods of time. For instance Gitea spent resources to undergo a SOC2 security audit for its SaaS offering while critical vulnerabilities demanded a new release. Advance notice of security releases is for customers only.
Gitea is developed on github, whereas forgejo is developed on and by codeberg, who use it as their main forge (also mentioned on that page). Someone dogfooding gives me more confidence in the software.
I think the reason is because apparently a lot of people are unhappy with a deal Nix inked apparently with a company that does business with the US’ Immigrations and Customs
I like #Nix, I do not like what has happened to it.
With no explanation of what happened, the conclusion is almost certainly Internal politics.
It seems like forgejo split from gitea because it looked like gitea was going the route of gitlab. Idk if NixOS is going to commercialize though. Based on recent gossip it sounds like they’re overly adverse to commercialization. IE banning people for having DoD connections. Aux’s talk about special interest groups makes it sound like they’re going embrace that like redhat.
As a side note, I understand why Gitea and Forgejo went for a “copy GitHub Actions” approach to their CI, but man do I wish more self-hosted repo software tried to copy Drone/Woodpecker instead. Iterative containers in the pipeline is such a smoother build experience, and it kind of sucks that Gitness is the only one doing it (that I know of).
There’s plenty, but I do not wish to hijack this thread, so… have a look at the Forgejo 7.0 release notes, the PRs it links to along notable features (and a boatload of bugfixes, many of which aren’t in Gitea). Then compare when (and if) similar features or fixes were implemented in Gitea.
The major difference (apart from governance, and on a technical level) between Gitea and Forgejo is that Forgejo cherry picks from Gitea weekly (being a hard fork doesn’t mean all ties are severed, it means that development happens independently). Gitea does not cherry pick from Forgejo. They could, the license permits it, and it even permits sublicensing, so it’s not an obstacle for Gitea Cloud or Gitea EE, either. They just don’t.
Not very clear to me that this is any more valuable than OG NixOS.
This sounds a lot like the forgejo vs gitea fork. I love the forgejo people but I am yet to see a sufficient differentiator.
https://forgejo.org/compare-to-gitea/
I dunno, some of these are a pretty big deal, in particular:
Gitea is developed on github, whereas forgejo is developed on and by codeberg, who use it as their main forge (also mentioned on that page). Someone dogfooding gives me more confidence in the software.
Tbf most of gitea is hosted on gitea: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029
Just not the main repo because of a blocking issue (which makes the above link pretty annoying)
I think the reason is because apparently a lot of people are unhappy with a deal Nix inked apparently with a company that does business with the US’ Immigrations and Customs
Wait so people got butthurt that a company made a deal with nix. That company also does business with ICE. And people are mad at Nix?
What am I missing?
Also companies and open source entities do business with all manner of government(s) all the time.
Don’t really know, hit something about it elsewhere, but it didn’t say anything more than that, but yeah, that seems to be the gist of things.
With no explanation of what happened, the conclusion is almost certainly Internal politics.
It seems like forgejo split from gitea because it looked like gitea was going the route of gitlab. Idk if NixOS is going to commercialize though. Based on recent gossip it sounds like they’re overly adverse to commercialization. IE banning people for having DoD connections. Aux’s talk about special interest groups makes it sound like they’re going embrace that like redhat.
They were still pulling in mainline Gitea changes while introducing their own stuff last I checked.
Pulling in mainline gitea changes, I did see. But I didn’t see any notable differences from gitea. Do you know of any?
Forgejo is working on federation. That is the big item.
Gitea claims to be working on federation too, which puzzles me that forgejo presents it as a differentiator.
Nothing concrete from what I can tell. Becoming a hard fork is relatively recent though (mid-November of last year, roughly).
As a side note, I understand why Gitea and Forgejo went for a “copy GitHub Actions” approach to their CI, but man do I wish more self-hosted repo software tried to copy Drone/Woodpecker instead. Iterative containers in the pipeline is such a smoother build experience, and it kind of sucks that Gitness is the only one doing it (that I know of).
There’s plenty, but I do not wish to hijack this thread, so… have a look at the Forgejo 7.0 release notes, the PRs it links to along notable features (and a boatload of bugfixes, many of which aren’t in Gitea). Then compare when (and if) similar features or fixes were implemented in Gitea.
The major difference (apart from governance, and on a technical level) between Gitea and Forgejo is that Forgejo cherry picks from Gitea weekly (being a hard fork doesn’t mean all ties are severed, it means that development happens independently). Gitea does not cherry pick from Forgejo. They could, the license permits it, and it even permits sublicensing, so it’s not an obstacle for Gitea Cloud or Gitea EE, either. They just don’t.
Last time I checked they were working on forgejo runners / actions!