I want to like Forgejo but the name is really terrible.
Is it “forj-joe”? Nah, that double-J sound is way too awkward.
Do you then merge the J sounds to make “forjo”? If so, why not just call it that?
Is it maybe “for-geh-joe”? That seems the most likely to me, but then that ignores the “build < forge” marketing on their website.
I know it’s pretty inconsequential, but it feels weird using a tool that you don’t even know how to pronounce the name of.
Yeah, like the other person mentioned, the origins of the word and its pronunciation are the very first thing in the FAQ on their website. It’s pronounced more like for-jey-oh.
afaik it got bought by some company and people fear that there will be anti-user changes like with all the other open source projects that were bought by a company in recent years.
No company has bought gitea. They just made a commercial entity which can accept contracts for enterprise installations and make some hyper specific customisations not needed for normal users (like some specific mode of internal authentication) in those installations. So far Gitea has been great still.
They did start a cloud service for hosting Gitea which introduces a direct incentive for them to make Gitea less hosting friendly by, for example, making newly added configuration options less comfortable to set up. And more recently some changes to code contributions that are not exactly community friendly (as a result forgejo will be unable to upstream some of their changes)
What lead to Forgejo, as far as I am aware, was less a problem that is already there and more the set of problems that have a very high chance of eventually manifesting, at which point forking the project would be too late.
They’re both pretty on par for the most part. If it’s too much of a hassle, there’s no real need to switch.
Now that Gitea is owned by a for-profit company, people are afraid that they’ll be making anti-user changes. This, Forgejo was born. It pulls from Gitea weekly, so it’s not missing anything. It’s also got some of its own features on top, but they’re currently pretty minor. Also, most of the features end up getting backported back to Gitea, so they’re mostly on par with each other. However, many features find themselves in Forgejo first, as they don’t have the copyright assignment for code that Gitea does. Additionally, security vulnerabilities tend to get fixed faster on Forgejo. They are working on federation plans, however, so we’ll see how that pans out.
Overall, there’s no downside of switching to Forgejo, and you’ll probably be protected if Gitea Ltd. makes some stupid decisions in the future. However, at the moment, there’s no immediate advantage to switching, so you can stick with Gitea if you’d like.
I thought gitea was doing federation too? Im pretty excited about that part, as I’ve wanted to move away from GitHub but the visibility it gives is just on another level. Users can’t register on my instance, therefore they also can’t open issues and PRs.
Is switching to forgejo more work than just changing my compose file a little? I hope my database can get transferred.
The developer working on federation plans to merge the changes into forgejo first and then from there into gitea but I’m not sure in how far the recent changes to gitea’s CLA have affected those plans.
Forgejo is a drop in replacement (they are committed to keeping it that way for as long as possible) so, as far as I know, simply changing the gitea image to the forgejo image is all you would need to do.
Gitea -> Forgejo, e.g.
Yeah Fogejo is amazing. Moved all my personal projects from GitLab to Codeberg recently. Wish I knew about it sooner
I want to like Forgejo but the name is really terrible.
Is it “forj-joe”? Nah, that double-J sound is way too awkward.
Do you then merge the J sounds to make “forjo”? If so, why not just call it that?
Is it maybe “for-geh-joe”? That seems the most likely to me, but then that ignores the “build < forge” marketing on their website.
I know it’s pretty inconsequential, but it feels weird using a tool that you don’t even know how to pronounce the name of.
There is an official pronounce on the site. It comes from Esperanto anyway.
Of course, the international non-ambiguous language.
You mean lojban or toki-pona?
Yeah, like the other person mentioned, the origins of the word and its pronunciation are the very first thing in the FAQ on their website. It’s pronounced more like for-jey-oh.
Thanks! That’s how I read it as a joke, but why not?
For yay ho would be too much though.
What happened to gitea?
afaik it got bought by some company and people fear that there will be anti-user changes like with all the other open source projects that were bought by a company in recent years.
No company has bought gitea. They just made a commercial entity which can accept contracts for enterprise installations and make some hyper specific customisations not needed for normal users (like some specific mode of internal authentication) in those installations. So far Gitea has been great still.
They did start a cloud service for hosting Gitea which introduces a direct incentive for them to make Gitea less hosting friendly by, for example, making newly added configuration options less comfortable to set up. And more recently some changes to code contributions that are not exactly community friendly (as a result forgejo will be unable to upstream some of their changes)
What lead to Forgejo, as far as I am aware, was less a problem that is already there and more the set of problems that have a very high chance of eventually manifesting, at which point forking the project would be too late.
Ah ok
The security implications on this page concern me: https://forgejo.org/compare/#better-security
Is that really the case? I selfhost gitea and am pretty happy with it.
They’re both pretty on par for the most part. If it’s too much of a hassle, there’s no real need to switch.
Now that Gitea is owned by a for-profit company, people are afraid that they’ll be making anti-user changes. This, Forgejo was born. It pulls from Gitea weekly, so it’s not missing anything. It’s also got some of its own features on top, but they’re currently pretty minor. Also, most of the features end up getting backported back to Gitea, so they’re mostly on par with each other. However, many features find themselves in Forgejo first, as they don’t have the copyright assignment for code that Gitea does. Additionally, security vulnerabilities tend to get fixed faster on Forgejo. They are working on federation plans, however, so we’ll see how that pans out.
Overall, there’s no downside of switching to Forgejo, and you’ll probably be protected if Gitea Ltd. makes some stupid decisions in the future. However, at the moment, there’s no immediate advantage to switching, so you can stick with Gitea if you’d like.
I thought gitea was doing federation too? Im pretty excited about that part, as I’ve wanted to move away from GitHub but the visibility it gives is just on another level. Users can’t register on my instance, therefore they also can’t open issues and PRs.
Is switching to forgejo more work than just changing my compose file a little? I hope my database can get transferred.
The developer working on federation plans to merge the changes into forgejo first and then from there into gitea but I’m not sure in how far the recent changes to gitea’s CLA have affected those plans.
Forgejo is a drop in replacement (they are committed to keeping it that way for as long as possible) so, as far as I know, simply changing the gitea image to the forgejo image is all you would need to do.
Gitea is still maintained though?