Remix.run Logo
Why developers are ditching GitHub for Codeberg and self-hosting alternatives(howtogeek.com)
102 points by Gedxx 2 hours ago | 62 comments
jorisw an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Sentiment for/against GitHub aside...

"Why X are doing Y" articles like these pretend that the premise of "X are doing Y" is true, conveniently skipping to the "Why" before proving that the premise is even accurate in any meaningful way.

This is why I never buy headlines that start out with "Why".

> developers are ditching

Proceeds to list but a handful of remotely meaningful repos against the hundreds of thousands on there

juanibiapina 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Agreed. But if I comment on this, I'm promoting the article. What do I do?

pjc50 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can just insert the word "some" as required.

jorisw an hour ago | parent [-]

Agreed, but the headline wouldn't travel nearly as well, if at all.

> Why some Americans are switching to soy

Would be more accurate than

> Why Americans are switching to soy

But wouldn't garner nearly the same amount of clicks.

There is conscious exaggeration in omitting 'some' - a fluff-blog click-farm trope I don't enjoy seeing in the developer space.

p-e-w 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’ve seen titles like “Why top scientists are leaving the United States” where the article itself talked about A SINGLE RESEARCHER relocating to France.

close04 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> a handful of remotely meaningful repos

If there's a trend to leave a platform it won't start with the most entrenched users (largest repos).

They acknowledge your concern in the article and their analysis does apply to those few who are leaving. But to be fair the title can be interpreted either way and the most reasonable read for anyone is "some of them are leaving". I'd find it clickbaity if they said "why developers are leaving en-masse" and then point out to the regular turnover. There's clearly a trend, what's not clear is if it gains momentum.

esperent 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

> If there's a trend

That's the point being made. Is there a trend? How do we know?

There's always some repos moving between hosting providers for all kinds of reasons. The burden of proof is on the author here to show there's been an increase and they don't do that.

hambos22 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's been 9 months since I ditched Github.

Currently I self-host Gitea [0], use its registry for Docker, NPM etc and act runners [1] for github actions alternative, everything secured under tailnet.

I'm extremely satisfied with that setup. It is batteries included & fire and forget.

Now I use Github only as backup by mirroring my self hosted repos.

[0] https://gitea.com

[1] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/act-runner

permalac 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Similar with forgejo. I mirrored all gh then flipped the ones I was using the most. The biggest win was on running apple runners in my mac, so the free gh actions can do other stuff.

onesandofgrain an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

You use github as a backup, why bother self-hosting then?

hambos22 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Github is an extra layer of backup, among normal backups.

[edit]

Notable reasons:

- Github runners went oftenly out of space & they were slow. With self hosted runners I don't have these issues anymore because I control the hardware.

Previously I was paying Docker Build Cloud/Depot for performance + Github Pro for extra minutes. Now it's zero cost, superb performance and unlimited minutes.

- I have a centralized registry with private packages and images.

- It's secure, I don't worry if I accidentally make a repo public or leak secrets. I control the access to it in network level.

- I own everything, in case something goes nuts (eg lose access to GH) I'm safe.

stanac an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not GP. Probably less dependencies on github, e.g. actions which sometimes don't work. This way github is a "dumb backup".

I selfhost forgejo (gitea fork) on home sever (nuc), similar setup with tailscale. I was planning to setup git mirror on a remote VM for backup, but since I am the only one using it and have everything on dev laptop and remote backups of nuc server I didn't bother to do that (I know I still should).

walrus01 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because the existence and continued normal operation of the primary is not dependent upon the capricious whims or instability of GitHub.

close04 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The self hosting will still be there and working as expected no matter what GH does (fails... again, DMCAs the repo, bans the account, etc.). Self hosting isn't only about being the only one with the data, it's also for the independence aspect. GH as a backup doesn't hinder the independence. Network effects are strong and make a lot of developers still have a GH presence as a secondary platform.

The evolution is when one can finally fully disconnect from GH, the main self hosted platform will continue to operate as if nothing happened.

A migration can have a period of parallel running.

benthecarman an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Our CI for our entire org at https://github.com/lightningdevkit was turned off for 3 weeks because an outside contributor who was wrongfully banned made a PR. After multiple appeals we received no explanation and was told it was a permanent ban until we made a stir on twitter. They sadly are no longer a good place to work.

TekMol 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The appeal of GitHub for me is not only in the git hosting, but also in codespaces. It gives me:

    1: An easy way to start a VM
    2: A one-click solution to access it via private https access
So for development, I dont need to dabble with spawning my own Hetzner VM or something. And I also do not have to dabble with getting a temporary domain and DNS so I can set up my own letsencrypt certs and point the domain to that VM.

I can just write an index.html, execute "sudo python -m http.server 80", click the link that then opens to something.app.github.dev and test my new web application.

This is why codespaces make starting a new product idea a thing of like 1 minute instead of 1 hour for me.

frabcus 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm trying sourcehut at the moment https://sourcehut.org/ and it seems really good - very simple and fast. And does seem to be free for hosting open source projects.

Anyone else used it and have thoughts on it?

notpushkin 2 minutes ago | parent [-]

I really really love it but I just can’t get myself to embrace the email workflow. Maybe I’ll make a “pull requests for git.sr.ht” app one day!

rmnull 21 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Genuinely curious here for someone who has tried self hosting git and has found it a pita to maintain...i want to know what is it that devs are flocking to other platforms and how are we sure that they won't pull all the red card signals that github is said to pull off.

thyristan 10 minutes ago | parent [-]

Have been self-hosting GitLab for my org a few years by now, with quite a few users (>800 atm). Updates are automatic via the GitLab Omnibus package repos. Once or twice per year some update requires intervention. Otherwise, nothing bad happens. Very happy so far.

Biggest problem at the moment is that AI scrapers (curse them and their owners, pox be upon their houses!) sometimes bring things to a crawl. But nothing that a few firewall rules and anoubis won't solve.

5701652400 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

+ predatory pricing hikes for AI

+ not honouring yearly commitments plans

kgeist 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We've been self-hosting GitLab for about a year now, and I don't remember it ever going down or being unavailable. We self-host almost everything else too (except for online meetings), and it's all been pretty stable as well. Some of the tools we self-host do go down occasionally, but it's usually just a matter of restarting the VM or adding more storage.

littlecranky67 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Mostly because developers (me included) don't like to be told we are being laid off due to AI that was trained on our free open-source hobby projects.

srean an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Anyone has suggestions for hosting open source hobby projects managed with Mercurial.

Loved Bitbucket's Mercurial offering. Looking for a replacement.

ezoe an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I guess three nines availability is important.

onion2k an hour ago | parent [-]

Not even hitting 1 nine at the moment - https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/

jopsen an hour ago | parent [-]

I object!

The dashboard clearly says 89.15% uptime!

Who says nines need to be leading?

etdznots an hour ago | parent [-]

With enough precision in the time metric there are infinitely many nines!

DonHopkins 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

Somewhere in 3.14159...% uptime there are as many nines as you like!

fmind-dev an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It reminds me of the time where I deployed Gitea for self-hosting my git projects. In the end, nobody wanted to use it beyond myself. I would love to have a true federation protocol for Git, to decentralize the solution further.

Scaled an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For private code, it just feels safer to self host that -- ideally behind wireguard for an extra layer of security.

For public code hosting, GitHub have banned too many people/projects for comfort. From security researchers to 18+ game devs, too many have been wrongfully banned.

klaussilveira 35 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We ditched GitHub for self-hosted Forgejo and could not be happier. The experience is smoother, faster and distraction-free.

feverzsj 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's pretty much broken by AI. Not only your private repos are not private, but also the LLM will leak them.

Havoc an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Im just glad the wider world has finally snapped out of their GitHub mono culture trance.

rob an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People are going to copy GitHub the way people copied Facebook… how is "Threads" doing again?

etdznots an hour ago | parent [-]

Not good but that’s unsurprising since Thread’s value proposition is indistinguishable from twitter’s. Mastadon and bluesky seem to have healthy userbases though

DonHopkins 20 minutes ago | parent [-]

Now if only the leader of Github would make Nazi salutes in public, regularly piss his pants due to frequent ketamine abuse, and cancel foreign aid causing 14 million brown children and other undesirable riff-raff to die by 2030, then maybe people would be as compelled to cancel Github as Twitter.

iamwil 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Anyone tried tangle as a replacement? Verdict?

ahmedehab_01 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Extreme generalization, most devs aren't ditching GitHub yet.

Cider9986 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why don't open source alternatives just copy the UI to make it easier to switch? Everyone knows the GitHub UI and it's intuitive. I'm happy to get more privacy and freedom, you don't have to make a worse design just to be different.

Fluxer figured this out and they're the best discord replacement imo.

https://fluxer.app/

GoblinSlayer an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I think they have the same interface. Pull requests are renamed to merge requests, that's all the difference I see. Wait for github to reshuffle the ui in a redesign churn.

duskdozer an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Acquiring github users may not be their highest priority.

kelvinjps10 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Inst gitea doing this?

tjpnz 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>it's intuitive

Until you have to work with stale GHAS tool configurations, remember whether a project uses rulesets or branch settings or find that comment you wrote on a PR (and then learn that the new PR "experience" fucking hides them above a certain threshold). Those are just the issues I encounter in a typical week.

jorisw an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> copy the UI

Good luck. The amount of features and screens on GitHub are vast aside from just those code / issues / PRs tabs.

allarm an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I’m not disputing how intuitive the GitHub interface is, but seriously, why is it so hard for technical professionals to set aside 10–20 minutes of their time to learn a new interface? Why has this even become an issue worth discussing?

fragmede 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No affiliation, but http://code.storage gets my vote.

latexr an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> One new user joins every second

Do they? Or is it that a new account is opened every second? Because I’ve been seeing so many spammers and scammers that those numbers have to be skewed.

onesandofgrain an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

self-hosted gitea/forgejo is still better

BrenBarn an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So sad to see that no articles about this even mention Mercurial. This is a golden opportunity for Hg providers to shine.

srean an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I miss Bitbucket's Mercurial offering.

DonHopkins 15 minutes ago | parent [-]

But Github is already fully volatile, capricious, fickle, erratic, unpredictable, variable, inconsistent, changeable, unstable, whimsical, protean, fluid, and a polluting poisonous room temperature liquid heavy metal, so why would you also need mercurial?

srean 5 minutes ago | parent [-]

:)

signa11 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

this not a `git` failure per se...

BrenBarn an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes, but the thing is just that if people are looking around for new providers it's an opportunity for alternative systems to attract attention and users.

navigate8310 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

I understand what you convey, however, users are tired of the git GUI, not git itself.

Madmallard 21 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think and hope we see a lot more of this before the adversarial imperative returns from the company side.

People using Claude Fable to just make replacements for disgustingly enshittified software. We desperately need browser extensions to help make websites less scummy across the board as well.

sneak an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Did we all forget that GitHub’s military-industrial complex owners over at Microsoft made sure to send the “business as usual” signal to the USG when they refused to stop helping ICE violate human rights en masse?

This was during the kidnap-and-rape-kids-in-cages days and before they started a general policy of kidnapping and/or summarily executing law-abiding citizens in the street. There are more reasons now to disassociate with collaborators with the US federal government than ever. I guess I could say I dropped GitHub before it was cool?

https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/github-and-us...

https://github.com/sneak

Microsoft is a morally bankrupt and despicable organization, just like Meta, Amazon, and modern Google and Apple. Anyone still doing ongoing business with them in 2026 is, imho, a fool.

youre-wrong3 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Can’t go a day without propaganda on HN.

graemep an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Anyone still doing ongoing business with them in 2026 is, imho, a fool.

So that would be almost everyone.

DonHopkins 9 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[Slow clap... building to thunderous applause. Standing ovation.]

Bravo! Well done! Encore! Encore!

Now do a foaming at the mouth diatribe about how unethical libertarian crypto scamming shills like you and Trump are ruining the economy and violently widening the gap between the oligarchy and poverty! Extra points for plugging your latest crypto scam as the solution.

cryo32 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I've ditched Github for all personal stuff. I just keep my repositories offline. I have a reliable backup process so what's the point in pushing it there? I don't give a shit about public profile, stars or any of that gamified crap and I certainly don't trust them.