> a pioneering (but no longer new) PR system

having used gerrit 10 years ago there's nothing about github's PRs that I like more, today.

> code navigation simply in a web browser

this is nice indeed, true.

> You write code, and almost everything works effortlessly.

if only. GHA are a hot mess because somehow we've landed in a local minimum of pretend-YAML-but-actually-shell-js-jinja-python and they have a smaller or bigger outage every other week, for years now.

> why developers like it so much

most everything else is much worse in at least one area and the most important thing it's what everyone uses. no one got fired for using github.

I'd rather solve advent of code in brainfuck than have to debug their CI workflows ever again.

> a pioneering (but no longer new) PR system

Having used Forgejo with AGit now, IMO the PR experience on GitHub is not great when trying to contribute to a new project. It's just unnecessarily convoluted.

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

That's not a Victorinox you're looking at, it's a cheap poorly made enshittified clone using a decades old playbook (e-e-e).

The focus on "Sponsorship buttons" and feature instead of fixing is just a waste of my time.

Because they are Codeberg I'm betting they have a philosophical aversion to using a cloud based ddos protection service like Cloudflare. Sadly the problem is that noone has come up with any other type of solution that actually works.

Just a reminder, Codeberg is for open source projects only, and maybe some dotfiles and such. Its on their frontpage and in their TOS.

There have been complaints about it on Reddit as well. I registered an account recently and to me the annoying thing is the constant "making sure you are not a bot" check. For now I see no reason to migrate, but I do admit Forgejo looks very interesting to self-host.

I mean, they're battling with DDoS all the time. I follow their account on Mastodon, and they're pretty open about it.

I believe the correct question is "Why they are getting DDoSed this much if they are not something important?"

For anyone who wants to follow: https://social.anoxinon.de/@Codeberg

Even their status page is under attack. Sorry for my French, but WTF?

GitHub uptime isn't perfect either. You will notice these outages from time to time if your employer is using it for more than just "store some git repos", e.g. using GHA for builds and deploys, packages etc.

What? It says it's up for 98.56% for the last 2 weeks.

Their most most recent update replaces all this with a list of recently updated PRs and issues. I've been learning on it heavily since it came out. One of the few recent changes that really feels like a clear improvement.

This seems workable to me. Github rose to prominence on the back of oss. What oss giveth oss can take away.

Didn't know about codeberg and can't even access it... Is it https://codeberg.org/ ??

That is surprising. It is the opposite for me.

  $ time curl -L 'https://codeberg.org/'
  real    0m3.063s
  user    0m0.060s
  sys     0m0.044s

  $ time curl -L 'https://github.com/'
  real    0m1.357s
  user    0m0.077s
  sys     0m0.096s

> Zig is distributed under the MIT License. MS is completely with in their rights to clone the git repository from Codeberg and do whatever with the source code. Including feeding it to their AI algorithms. Moving it to Codeberg doesn't really fix that. I get that some people want to restrict what people can do with source code (including using it for capitalist purposes or indeed ai/machine learning). But the whole point of many open source licenses (and especially the MIT license) is actually the opposite: allowing people to do whatever they want with the source code.

MS training AIs on Zig isn't their complaint here. They're saying that Github has become a worse service because MS aren't working on the fundamentals any more and just chasing the AI dream, and trying to get AI to write code for it is having bad results.

Oh no, our decentralized VCS will be… decentralized!

Seriously though the big problem to solve will be squatters, when there are three logical places for a module to be hosted. That could create issues if you want to migrate.

I would rather have this happening after a contender to git has surfaced. Something for instance with more project tracking built in so migration were simpler.

> fragmented ecosystem

This sounds a bit like an oxymoron. More diversity will only help the ecosystem IMHO.

All those different 'git forges' use git as version control system and the same issue and PR workflows. There is no fragmentation, unless you consider one git url being different from another git url 'fragmentation' ;)

You say fragmented I say decentralized.

Hopefully one of the efforts to build distributed pull requests will take off, so that all the forges other than github can band together and interoperate.

The D in DVCS working as expected.

I prefer a pletora of code hosting sites, that one massive hub controlled by a single one. We can see how bad is when there is a monopoly or cuasi-monopoly.

> So frustrating that Github doesn't support such an obvious workflow.

It kind of does.

I used this a lot in several jobs to work in dependent tickets in advance. Just make another branch on top of the previous (a PR to the other PR branch).

People could review the child PR before the parent was merged. And it requires some less than trivial git knowledge to manage effectively, but nothing extraordinary. Any solution for stacked PRs based on git would also require it (or a custom tool).

I think I'm on their side on this one. From git perspective, it works just as I expect. Something else probably belongs to JIRA or project management instead.

Not spending on maintenance is bad.

Not spending on maintenance and spending gobs on something many people don’t want is far worse. It says we have the money, we just don’t give a fuck.

Why would zig care that a project written in zig is used for AI?

> I got places to be

Like, reading and posting on Hacker News?

The original post was specifically about technical grievances, “MS tools being used by the baddies” was mentioned only in passing.

https://ziglang.org/news/migrating-from-github-to-codeberg/

> Putting aside GitHub’s relationship with ICE

That was the extent of it. Six words.

Furthermore, this submission is an independent post, not from Zig, reporting on the original and adding more context.

> To use a great quote "either do or don't, but I got places to be".

What exactly is your complaint? The move had already been completed at the time of the original Zig post. They did do it.

There’s no incongruence between posts. The nature of your discontent or how it could possibly affect you isn’t clear in the slightest.