“For a long time Firefox Desktop development has supported both Mercurial and Git users. This dual SCM requirement places a significant burden on teams which are already stretched thin in parts. We have made the decision to move Firefox development to Git.”
ilinamorato@lemmy.world
on 07 Nov 2023 11:55
collapse
But a few lines later:
Although we’ll be hosting the repository on GitHub, our contribution workflow
will remain unchanged and we will not be accepting Pull Requests at this time
So I don’t know if you meant that the focus of the change wasn’t GH or that they weren’t using GH at all, but it seems like the latter is untrue.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 12:02
nextcollapse
you meant that the focus of the change wasn’t GH
They are dropping Mercurial and focusing on Git. Incidentally, they happen to host the Git project on GitHub. GitHub is used for hosting, and they don’t even use basic features such as pull requests.
This is the crucial detail that everyone is missing.
It’s the same as with the Linux kernel GitHub mirror.
dekaf@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 08:32
nextcollapse
So, from a decentralised solution to the world’s biggest repository that actively infringes on free software by violating licenses in their co-pilot unfree program.
Decisions like these, coupled with the fact they are transparently corrupt make me see no indication that Mozilla is heading towards a better future, or contributing anything of value more than they have contributed in the past.
nottheengineer@feddit.de
on 07 Nov 2023 09:20
nextcollapse
But what browser do we use then?
dekaf@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 09:33
collapse
Firefox (or its forks, depending on how much you value privacy and your needs can be met while breaking some data-collecting websites.)
I am not calling for any action in my comment, but things are not looking good for the future of Firefox.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 11:00
collapse
So, from a decentralised solution to the world’s biggest repository
You need to check your notes. Git is decentralized, even if you host a repository somewhere.
Decisions like these (…)
As a Firefox user, these initiatives matter nothing in my decision to use Firefox. In fact, I’m glad they went this way. They need to focus on working on code instead of wasting their time with irrelevant details.
dekaf@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 11:39
collapse
You need to check your notes. Git is decentralized, even if you host a repository somewhere.
I am not sure if you’re wilfully ignoring my point about how centeralised GitHub is, but I’ll assume good faith:
GitHub is enshittifying everything that has to do with Git. It presents a very common pattern where nonfree software providers embrace an open standard, extend it maliciously towards a less open experience by raising capital or being acquired by a large company with massive funding then make its users trapped in
many systems that make it a hard time to migrate to other places and eventually introduce anti-features and lock-in mechanisms in late stages of the software cycle.
As a Firefox user, these initiatives matter nothing in my decision to use Firefox.
You should care. As a Firefox user, you should be aware of how the funding and hiring of the people working on Firefox go. For example, most notable updates to Firefox, including Firefox Quantum, were developed in Servo, a different browser project that Mozilla completely abandoned and fired all its employees working on it, all the meanwhile in the same year the CEO gave herself a pay raise that would have paid for multiple developers to work on something proven essential to the performance and security of Firefox.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 11:53
collapse
how centeralised GitHub
It’s a pointless and irrelevant remark. Mozilla uses Git to track work on Firefox. GitHub provides Git repositories. I can clone Firefox out of GitHub, create an account on GitLab/Bitbucket, push the code there, and GitHub does not feature as a concern at all.
What point can you possibly think you’re able to make regarding GitHub?
GitHub is enshittifying everything that has to do with Git.
Nonsense. Speaking as someone who actually hosts the same projects on GitHub and other version control providers, GitHub does not even feature as an implementation detail.
I’m starting to think you’re just trolling.
You should care.
I do my best to not waste my time with irrelevant nonsense. It’s silly to believe that the version control system you use has any influence on the quality of the software you deliver.
robinm@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 09:28
nextcollapse
Moving to git is nice but I don’t understand why they don’t self-host a gitlab instance.
Lmaydev@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 10:11
nextcollapse
Money most likely.
ck_@discuss.tchncs.de
on 07 Nov 2023 10:36
collapse
I would doubt that. Github for organizations becomes rather expensive rather quickly if you want to retain some level of control, so I doubt Mozilla will opt for the minimum “free for open source” offering.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 11:19
collapse
Github for organizations becomes rather expensive rather quickly (…)
I’m not sure if that’s relevant. GitHub’s free plan also supports GitHub organizations, and GitHub’s Team plan costs only around $4/(developer*month). You can do the math to check how many developers you’d have to register in a GitHub Team plan to match the operational expense of hiring a person to manage a self-hosted instance from 9-to-5.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 10:57
nextcollapse
but I don’t understand why they don’t self-host
Why would anyone self-host a FLOSS project? Trade secrets is not a concern, nor is it barring access to the source code repository. Why would anyone waste their resources managing a service that adds no value beyond a third-party service like GitHub?
lowleveldata@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 11:28
nextcollapse
Because Microsoft will eat your ass in your sleep
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 11:44
nextcollapse
Because Microsoft will eat your ass in your sleep
So Microsoft has access to Firefox’s source code. So what? Isn’t the point of a FLOSS project that your source code should be made available to everyone?
Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.world
on 07 Nov 2023 12:09
nextcollapse
I think they were making a joke
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 12:14
collapse
I think they were making a joke
The missing /s, coupled with some absurd comments on this thread, make it hard to tell apart the jokes from the activists.
Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.world
on 07 Nov 2023 12:22
collapse
That’s fair, but with that said, I’m gonna eat your ass
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Nov 2023 12:29
collapse
Mozilla allegedly stands for a bunch of stuff that is be definition incompatible with hosting code on GitHub as it is. I bet a lot of people were expecting a lot more from them and instead got this move. Well… I guess this is like unique browser ID that each installation has or the fact that it contacts a 3rd party analytics company no matter your settings - people start by complaining and eventually even say it is right. lol so much for privacy and whatnot.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 09 Nov 2023 08:11
collapse
Mozilla allegedly stands for a bunch of stuff that is be definition incompatible with hosting code on GitHub as it is.
I bet a lot of people were expecting a lot more from them (…)
You only speak for yourself. You do not have a mandate to speak on behalf of anyone, including Firefox users such as myself. Keep your personal opinions as personal. You have the right to have a personal opinion, but you do not have the right to pass them off as anyone else’s.
Your statement is fundamentally wrong on many levels, including the fact that it goes against the fundamental premise of FLOSS which is tha
What is it in my statement that goes against that? Nothing. Just read Mozilla’s Manifesto and then tell me how hosting code on GitHub doesn’t go against Principle 2, 3, 4 and 7. Mozzila’s missing is “to ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all” and by pushing their code on Github they’re making it more popular, essentially perpetuating Microsoft’s dominant market position that is very likely to result in even more abuse, more ecosystems and less open solutions in the future. There’s no way to justify a company with Mozilla’s resources doing this.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 11 Nov 2023 15:18
collapse
Nothing. Just read Mozilla’s Manifesto
Your trolling skills are subpar but given this is a lazy weekend I guess I’ll bite just for the entertaining value.
Let’s go through “Principle 2, 3, 4 and 7”, shall we?
Principle 2 The internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible.
Making source code available through GitHub is a realization of Principle 2. You got it exactly backwards.
Principle 3 The internet must enrich the lives of individual human beings.
I don’t even know what could possess you to believe that making a software project available through GitHub would jeopardize this. Anyway.
Principle 7 Free and open source software promotes the development of the internet as a public resource.
That’s what making FLOSS projects available to the public through GitHub does. GitHub, by providing managed hosting to Mozilla to host Firefox’s project tree and making it available to the public, is unquestionably meeting this goal, both in its letter and its spirit.
You need to put some effort into finding things to be outraged about.
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Nov 2023 12:02
collapse
Go on…
amju_wolf@pawb.social
on 07 Nov 2023 13:19
collapse
Because while you do have control (and “copies”) of the source code repository, that’s not really true for the ecosystem around it - tickets, pull requests, …
If Microsoft decided to fuck you over you’d have a hard time migrating the “community” around that source code somewhere else.
Obviously depends on what features you are using, but for example losing all tickets would be problematic for any projects.
Apparently Mozilla won’t be even accepting PRs there so it doesn’t matter much.
What if you self host in AWS and Amazon decides to fuck you over? What if you decide to self from home and your ISP decides fuck you over? What if? So many what ifs… How do you even live in this world?
nitefox@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Nov 2023 12:41
nextcollapse
Yeah like, wtf
amju_wolf@pawb.social
on 14 Nov 2023 13:27
collapse
When you use a cloud solution (and especially one with a vendor lock in like Amazon) then yeah, you are fucked there too and I’d question why you did it in the first place.
If you have your own infrastructure - be it a server at home or whatever - then you can always just move it elsewhere, get some other ISP, whatever. There is no lock-in. Inconvenience, sure, but you can migrate elsewhere. That’s just not true about all the other things mentioned, or the friction would be much higher.
Have you actually used anything cloud? Because there’s literally no friction to move things around. Unless you decide to use proprietary features.
amju_wolf@pawb.social
on 15 Nov 2023 11:33
collapse
With AWS especially there is a shitton of proprietary stuff. Most of the friction is in knowledge however; the cloud environments differ, are configured differently, have different limitations and caveats, etc. Someone who has only ever worked with AWS will have to learn a lot of things anew if they switch. Hell there’s a reason why “AWS engineer” is a dedicated role in some companies.
Now, if you only manually set up some VMs and configure them like you would a regular server then sure, it’s easy to migrate. But when you are missing 99% of the features of the cloud environment are you actually using it?
For me the purpose of the cloud is the ability to deploy my projects on rented infrastructure independently of the provider. Tools like Terraform and Kubernetes help with the abstraction of providers.
As for proprietary features I prefer to use open source alternatives like Supabase, which I then can deploy to any cloud and migrate between clouds if needed.
amju_wolf@pawb.social
on 21 Nov 2023 12:25
collapse
Well then you aren’t probably taking advantage of most of the stuff AWS offers and is actually really good for. Which isn’t really criticism, but then I wouldn’t really call it cloud? It’s more like just infrastructure as a service.
Infrastructure as a service is literally the definition of a cloud. Everything is just bells and whistles.
lysdexic@programming.dev
on 09 Nov 2023 08:15
collapse
Because while you do have control (and “copies”) of the source code repository, that’s not really true for the ecosystem around it - tickets, pull requests, …
The announcement to drop Mercurial quite clearly states that their workflow won’t change and that GitHub pull requests are not considered a part of their workflow.
Also, that’s entirely irrelevant to start with. Either you care about software freedom and software quality, or you don’t. If you care about software freedom you care about having free and unrestricted access to FLOSS projects such as Firefox, which GitHub clearly provides. If you care about software quality you’d care about the Firefox team picking the absolute best tools for the job that they themselves picked.
amju_wolf@pawb.social
on 07 Nov 2023 13:19
nextcollapse
Or, you know, Gitea or such.
SomeRandomWords@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Nov 2023 17:02
collapse
I keep hearing people only on Lemmy bring up Gitea but I haven’t really heard of it otherwise. What’s the appeal and what’s keeping it locked away with the Lemmy community?
knopwob@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 13:29
collapse
Imho the main argument for github is that it lowers the hurdle for new ane ad-hoc contributions like issues.
I’m problably too lazy to registsr a new account for your instance just to open a bug report.
I’d love a federated git/issue/wiki thing
SomeRandomWords@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Nov 2023 14:00
nextcollapse
Are they moving issues or just code storage to GitHub?
allywilson@sopuli.xyz
on 07 Nov 2023 15:36
collapse
Code storage. They’re keeping bugzilla.
ericjmorey@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 16:06
collapse
💀
xoggy@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 14:43
nextcollapse
In my opinion that sounds like a plus. People that are too lazy to register an account to put in a code merge request or report a bug aren’t going to be writing quality code or quality bug reports.
jack@monero.town
on 07 Nov 2023 14:53
nextcollapse
Yes but knowing of a bug is better than not knowing of a bug
xoggy@programming.dev
on 08 Nov 2023 04:04
collapse
Working in a busy codebase for a long time when I have to spend time a non-trivial amount of time triaging through tickets I can’t reproduce that is taking time away from legitimate bug and request tickets I can be working on. It can seriously lead to burnout.
You don’t have to fix every issue, there are also other volunteers who might look at it.
If the reproducible instructions aren’t clear enough or are missing, just ask for more info. If they can’t deliver on that, close it or just move on and other people might take care of it
dragnet@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 07 Nov 2023 19:47
collapse
Speak for yourself, I’ve been prepared to submit detailed bug reports before the process in place to do so turned me off.
xoggy@programming.dev
on 08 Nov 2023 04:05
collapse
I did speak for myself. I said “In my opinion”.
onlinepersona@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 17:09
nextcollapse
It wouldn’t make it more difficult than with mercurial, which isn’t supported by github either.
ericjmorey@programming.dev
on 08 Nov 2023 11:10
nextcollapse
They’re going to continue using Bugzilla for bug reports.
GitHub will just serve as code mirror. Patches and bugs will still go through Mozilla’s usually channels.
ericjmorey@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 16:11
nextcollapse
Using and financially contributing to Codberg seems like a good next step to take. Doubt they will though.
onlinepersona@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 17:11
nextcollapse
The repository will be hosted on GitHub, though the move is expected to take “at least six months before the migration begins.”
Another major opensource project that chooses a proprietary hosting platform 🤷
Sigmatics@lemmy.ca
on 07 Nov 2023 20:09
nextcollapse
Let’s be honest here, at least like 98% of the popular OSS is on GitHub at this point. You don’t have to like it, but it’s how things are
onlinepersona@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 20:29
nextcollapse
Doesn’t mean that they have to continue putting stuff there. But oh well, maybe once ForgeFed becomes a real thing, things might change a little.
Sigmatics@lemmy.ca
on 07 Nov 2023 22:01
nextcollapse
It does. OSS needs visibility, it needs contributions
GitHub’s community and discoverability features really help with that, as much as it sucks that they got acquired by Microsoft
philm@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 22:03
collapse
People use the most convenient way to collaborate, and that’s for me currently Github. Really hope, some day a better alternative with ForgeFed becomes reality.
Open source was M$’ archenemy that they knew they couldn’t compete against. So they slithered in and co-opted it and everyone just ignores the perils and carries on.
technom@programming.dev
on 09 Nov 2023 07:15
collapse
Not to mention the fact that they trained copilot using code on it, without informing or taking permission from the authors and they justify it citing fair use policy.
GitHub is just serving as public code mirror, it’s not going to be their hosting platform.
fzz@programming.dev
on 07 Nov 2023 18:56
nextcollapse
Ah! 😣 Why not nest or self-hosted pijul!?
IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Nov 2023 06:06
nextcollapse
It’s not battle tested on massive projects nor does it have the prior mindshare git has. It doesn’t have a lot of tooling either. (Does any CI/CD system support pijul?) It has nice properties, but ultimately git with all it’s terrible warts is well understood.
fzz@programming.dev
on 08 Nov 2023 14:22
nextcollapse
CI/CD
Pijul as git or hg or any other is a VCS, so what are you talking about?
If you mean web-service like GitHub with social things and CI/CD services, so yes, nest have CI/CD with nix. But mostly you shouldn’t host your huge project on the Nest because, as I’m absolutely sure, you as anyone other should create your own host (public or private) to support decentralization to prevent github-like centralization situation. Pijul was created with decentralization in first place in mind.
Not tested with big projects in production
Not publicly. Many private projects, personal and in-company, that uses pijul are existing. Personally I have one HUGE personal. Also I worked for two companies where pijul is used.
Seems to my mistake. You question is about CI/CD services that supports Pijul. So yes, almost zero.
But it’s like ouroboros. Just use pijul more then git and talk about it, and services will support it soon.
technom@programming.dev
on 09 Nov 2023 07:13
collapse
Neither has reached 1.0. They’re perpetually unstable.
mr_satan@monyet.cc
on 08 Nov 2023 19:41
nextcollapse
Chromium has a mirror on GitHub and it’s fine. While it feels a little strange to have just one mirror (on GitHub), after moving to git entirely, nobody is stopping to them from hosting a GitLab mirror.
ActionHank@sopuli.xyz
on 13 Nov 2023 07:04
collapse
Cool now I can actually check it out. Tried to previously but my connection failed about an hour into the clone. --depth=1 --shallow-submodules --recurse-submodules should really be given its own command in git. Not really sure why’d they choose MS as their host though.
threaded - newest
.
Slightly confusing title here. A less confusing title would be “Mozilla drops support for Mercurial, moves Firefox repository to GitHub”.
.
It’s not even about GitHub at all. Taken straight out of the announcement:
But a few lines later:
So I don’t know if you meant that the focus of the change wasn’t GH or that they weren’t using GH at all, but it seems like the latter is untrue.
They are dropping Mercurial and focusing on Git. Incidentally, they happen to host the Git project on GitHub. GitHub is used for hosting, and they don’t even use basic features such as pull requests.
Again, this is really not about GitHub at all.
This is the crucial detail that everyone is missing.
It’s the same as with the Linux kernel GitHub mirror.
So, from a decentralised solution to the world’s biggest repository that actively infringes on free software by violating licenses in their co-pilot unfree program.
Decisions like these, coupled with the fact they are transparently corrupt make me see no indication that Mozilla is heading towards a better future, or contributing anything of value more than they have contributed in the past.
But what browser do we use then?
Firefox (or its forks, depending on how much you value privacy and your needs can be met while breaking some data-collecting websites.)
I am not calling for any action in my comment, but things are not looking good for the future of Firefox.
You need to check your notes. Git is decentralized, even if you host a repository somewhere.
As a Firefox user, these initiatives matter nothing in my decision to use Firefox. In fact, I’m glad they went this way. They need to focus on working on code instead of wasting their time with irrelevant details.
I am not sure if you’re wilfully ignoring my point about how centeralised GitHub is, but I’ll assume good faith:
GitHub is enshittifying everything that has to do with Git. It presents a very common pattern where nonfree software providers embrace an open standard, extend it maliciously towards a less open experience by raising capital or being acquired by a large company with massive funding then make its users trapped in many systems that make it a hard time to migrate to other places and eventually introduce anti-features and lock-in mechanisms in late stages of the software cycle.
You should care. As a Firefox user, you should be aware of how the funding and hiring of the people working on Firefox go. For example, most notable updates to Firefox, including Firefox Quantum, were developed in Servo, a different browser project that Mozilla completely abandoned and fired all its employees working on it, all the meanwhile in the same year the CEO gave herself a pay raise that would have paid for multiple developers to work on something proven essential to the performance and security of Firefox.
It’s a pointless and irrelevant remark. Mozilla uses Git to track work on Firefox. GitHub provides Git repositories. I can clone Firefox out of GitHub, create an account on GitLab/Bitbucket, push the code there, and GitHub does not feature as a concern at all.
What point can you possibly think you’re able to make regarding GitHub?
Nonsense. Speaking as someone who actually hosts the same projects on GitHub and other version control providers, GitHub does not even feature as an implementation detail.
I’m starting to think you’re just trolling.
I do my best to not waste my time with irrelevant nonsense. It’s silly to believe that the version control system you use has any influence on the quality of the software you deliver.
Moving to git is nice but I don’t understand why they don’t self-host a gitlab instance.
Money most likely.
I would doubt that. Github for organizations becomes rather expensive rather quickly if you want to retain some level of control, so I doubt Mozilla will opt for the minimum “free for open source” offering.
I’m not sure if that’s relevant. GitHub’s free plan also supports GitHub organizations, and GitHub’s Team plan costs only around $4/(developer*month). You can do the math to check how many developers you’d have to register in a GitHub Team plan to match the operational expense of hiring a person to manage a self-hosted instance from 9-to-5.
Why would anyone self-host a FLOSS project? Trade secrets is not a concern, nor is it barring access to the source code repository. Why would anyone waste their resources managing a service that adds no value beyond a third-party service like GitHub?
Because Microsoft will eat your ass in your sleep
So Microsoft has access to Firefox’s source code. So what? Isn’t the point of a FLOSS project that your source code should be made available to everyone?
I think they were making a joke
The missing /s, coupled with some absurd comments on this thread, make it hard to tell apart the jokes from the activists.
That’s fair, but with that said, I’m gonna eat your ass
Don’t threaten me with a good time
Mozilla allegedly stands for a bunch of stuff that is be definition incompatible with hosting code on GitHub as it is. I bet a lot of people were expecting a lot more from them and instead got this move. Well… I guess this is like unique browser ID that each installation has or the fact that it contacts a 3rd party analytics company no matter your settings - people start by complaining and eventually even say it is right. lol so much for privacy and whatnot.
Your statement is fundamentally wrong on many levels, including the fact that it goes against the fundamental premise of FLOSS which is that “the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.”
You only speak for yourself. You do not have a mandate to speak on behalf of anyone, including Firefox users such as myself. Keep your personal opinions as personal. You have the right to have a personal opinion, but you do not have the right to pass them off as anyone else’s.
What is it in my statement that goes against that? Nothing. Just read Mozilla’s Manifesto and then tell me how hosting code on GitHub doesn’t go against Principle 2, 3, 4 and 7. Mozzila’s missing is “to ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all” and by pushing their code on Github they’re making it more popular, essentially perpetuating Microsoft’s dominant market position that is very likely to result in even more abuse, more ecosystems and less open solutions in the future. There’s no way to justify a company with Mozilla’s resources doing this.
Your trolling skills are subpar but given this is a lazy weekend I guess I’ll bite just for the entertaining value.
Let’s go through “Principle 2, 3, 4 and 7”, shall we?
Making source code available through GitHub is a realization of Principle 2. You got it exactly backwards.
I don’t even know what could possess you to believe that making a software project available through GitHub would jeopardize this. Anyway.
That’s what making FLOSS projects available to the public through GitHub does. GitHub, by providing managed hosting to Mozilla to host Firefox’s project tree and making it available to the public, is unquestionably meeting this goal, both in its letter and its spirit.
You need to put some effort into finding things to be outraged about.
Go on…
Because while you do have control (and “copies”) of the source code repository, that’s not really true for the ecosystem around it - tickets, pull requests, …
If Microsoft decided to fuck you over you’d have a hard time migrating the “community” around that source code somewhere else.
Obviously depends on what features you are using, but for example losing all tickets would be problematic for any projects.
Apparently Mozilla won’t be even accepting PRs there so it doesn’t matter much.
What if you self host in AWS and Amazon decides to fuck you over? What if you decide to self from home and your ISP decides fuck you over? What if? So many what ifs… How do you even live in this world?
Yeah like, wtf
When you use a cloud solution (and especially one with a vendor lock in like Amazon) then yeah, you are fucked there too and I’d question why you did it in the first place.
If you have your own infrastructure - be it a server at home or whatever - then you can always just move it elsewhere, get some other ISP, whatever. There is no lock-in. Inconvenience, sure, but you can migrate elsewhere. That’s just not true about all the other things mentioned, or the friction would be much higher.
Have you actually used anything cloud? Because there’s literally no friction to move things around. Unless you decide to use proprietary features.
With AWS especially there is a shitton of proprietary stuff. Most of the friction is in knowledge however; the cloud environments differ, are configured differently, have different limitations and caveats, etc. Someone who has only ever worked with AWS will have to learn a lot of things anew if they switch. Hell there’s a reason why “AWS engineer” is a dedicated role in some companies.
Now, if you only manually set up some VMs and configure them like you would a regular server then sure, it’s easy to migrate. But when you are missing 99% of the features of the cloud environment are you actually using it?
For me the purpose of the cloud is the ability to deploy my projects on rented infrastructure independently of the provider. Tools like Terraform and Kubernetes help with the abstraction of providers.
As for proprietary features I prefer to use open source alternatives like Supabase, which I then can deploy to any cloud and migrate between clouds if needed.
Well then you aren’t probably taking advantage of most of the stuff AWS offers and is actually really good for. Which isn’t really criticism, but then I wouldn’t really call it cloud? It’s more like just infrastructure as a service.
Infrastructure as a service is literally the definition of a cloud. Everything is just bells and whistles.
The announcement to drop Mercurial quite clearly states that their workflow won’t change and that GitHub pull requests are not considered a part of their workflow.
Also, that’s entirely irrelevant to start with. Either you care about software freedom and software quality, or you don’t. If you care about software freedom you care about having free and unrestricted access to FLOSS projects such as Firefox, which GitHub clearly provides. If you care about software quality you’d care about the Firefox team picking the absolute best tools for the job that they themselves picked.
Or, you know, Gitea or such.
I keep hearing people only on Lemmy bring up Gitea but I haven’t really heard of it otherwise. What’s the appeal and what’s keeping it locked away with the Lemmy community?
Imho the main argument for github is that it lowers the hurdle for new ane ad-hoc contributions like issues. I’m problably too lazy to registsr a new account for your instance just to open a bug report.
I’d love a federated git/issue/wiki thing
Are they moving issues or just code storage to GitHub?
Code storage. They’re keeping bugzilla.
💀
In my opinion that sounds like a plus. People that are too lazy to register an account to put in a code merge request or report a bug aren’t going to be writing quality code or quality bug reports.
Yes but knowing of a bug is better than not knowing of a bug
Working in a busy codebase for a long time when I have to spend time a non-trivial amount of time triaging through tickets I can’t reproduce that is taking time away from legitimate bug and request tickets I can be working on. It can seriously lead to burnout.
You don’t have to fix every issue, there are also other volunteers who might look at it.
If the reproducible instructions aren’t clear enough or are missing, just ask for more info. If they can’t deliver on that, close it or just move on and other people might take care of it
Speak for yourself, I’ve been prepared to submit detailed bug reports before the process in place to do so turned me off.
I did speak for myself. I said “In my opinion”.
It wouldn’t make it more difficult than with mercurial, which isn’t supported by github either.
They’re going to continue using Bugzilla for bug reports.
GitHub will just serve as code mirror. Patches and bugs will still go through Mozilla’s usually channels.
Using and financially contributing to Codberg seems like a good next step to take. Doubt they will though.
Another major opensource project that chooses a proprietary hosting platform 🤷
Let’s be honest here, at least like 98% of the popular OSS is on GitHub at this point. You don’t have to like it, but it’s how things are
Doesn’t mean that they have to continue putting stuff there. But oh well, maybe once ForgeFed becomes a real thing, things might change a little.
It does. OSS needs visibility, it needs contributions
GitHub’s community and discoverability features really help with that, as much as it sucks that they got acquired by Microsoft
People use the most convenient way to collaborate, and that’s for me currently Github. Really hope, some day a better alternative with ForgeFed becomes reality.
Open source was M$’ archenemy that they knew they couldn’t compete against. So they slithered in and co-opted it and everyone just ignores the perils and carries on.
Not to mention the fact that they trained copilot using code on it, without informing or taking permission from the authors and they justify it citing fair use policy.
GitHub is just serving as public code mirror, it’s not going to be their hosting platform.
Ah! 😣 Why not nest or self-hosted pijul!?
It’s not battle tested on massive projects nor does it have the prior mindshare git has. It doesn’t have a lot of tooling either. (Does any CI/CD system support pijul?) It has nice properties, but ultimately git with all it’s terrible warts is well understood.
Pijul as git or hg or any other is a VCS, so what are you talking about? If you mean web-service like GitHub with social things and CI/CD services, so yes, nest have CI/CD with nix. But mostly you shouldn’t host your huge project on the Nest because, as I’m absolutely sure, you as anyone other should create your own host (public or private) to support decentralization to prevent github-like centralization situation. Pijul was created with decentralization in first place in mind.
Not publicly. Many private projects, personal and in-company, that uses pijul are existing. Personally I have one HUGE personal. Also I worked for two companies where pijul is used.
Seems to my mistake. You question is about CI/CD services that supports Pijul. So yes, almost zero. But it’s like ouroboros. Just use pijul more then git and talk about it, and services will support it soon.
Neither has reached 1.0. They’re perpetually unstable.
Chromium has a mirror on GitHub and it’s fine. While it feels a little strange to have just one mirror (on GitHub), after moving to git entirely, nobody is stopping to them from hosting a GitLab mirror.
Cool now I can actually check it out. Tried to previously but my connection failed about an hour into the clone. --depth=1 --shallow-submodules --recurse-submodules should really be given its own command in git. Not really sure why’d they choose MS as their host though.