Remember, if all you need is a git remote to push to somewhere via ssh, `git init --bare` on your server should be available and is solid if you don't need a web interface. Now you've got something you can push to on a shared server.
Unless you really also want a web interface, issue tracking, et. al. Then, use any of these fine tools. Go wild!
I don't really need the web interface, but the actions are useful. Automatically building updated docker images and software packages is enough to accept the gitea complications, but gitlab is way too heavy IMHO
Actions support running on times. Sure, I could wire up a Rube Goldberg of systemd user timers and user units that trigger on hooks or I can store some yaml in the repo and it just works (tm)(r).
Sometimes the juice isn't worth the squeeze, and for me, doing it all custom isn't worth it for my home projects.
I feel like this is one of those topics where compromise is futile. I use GitLab at work and use plain git on personal projects. I don't like spending time on tools that aren't either teaching me or paying me.
Unfortunately, seems like this is Forgejo's best suggestion on how to compare the two: https://i.imgur.com/j1665QR.png. Not sure that page helps much if you're not already bought in to a free-software-absolutist mindset
I wish they had an actual feature comparison list. I've been trying to find anyone who can give me a list of non-trivial differences between the two; so far it's always either FUD about Gitea's governance and security structure or ForgeFed. The former has made me rather wary of the project[0] and the latter has been stagnate for years and I'm no longer convinced anything will come from it. Otherwise it's just silence.
Personally I thought Forgejo was doing better work on their actions runner for a while from casual changelog browsing but Gitea's been putting a lot of work into theirs. Otherwise it mostly still looks like a soft-fork in practice to me.
[0] Not that I'm thrilled with Gitea's semi-open-core setup and company but they make it seem like they're kicking puppies and dangling features over non-enterprise users head before snatching them away.
Would you also argue that the technical quality, efficiency, capacity, performance etc. of a piece of machinery, too, is way less important than the social and political values of its manufacturer? Say, a piece of medical equipment used in a hospital to keep a patient alive.
> This release contains security fixes. To give everyone time to upgrade, details will be added to this post in about a week.
Is this something that has been happening for a while or a new trend due to LLM concerns? I understand the reasoning, it just made me do a double take because I haven't really seen that before.
With Gitea specifically or in general? A lot of different software has silently included security fixes in updates combined with other changes and then later revealed what security fixes were made or stayed quiet about it all together, since long before LLMs could analyze changes.
Security researchers and malware authors would reverse engineer software updates of proprietary software, and scrutinise source code changes of open source projects to find secretly shipped security fixes.
(bias note: I am a project lead of Gitea) this approach is based on what peertube has been doing, and is being attempted as an alternative approach to what we've been doing previously due to feedback we've been receiving from the community.
Unless you really also want a web interface, issue tracking, et. al. Then, use any of these fine tools. Go wild!
Gitea or Forgejo with actions is almost certainly easier, but it's possible to do it with pure git.
Sometimes the juice isn't worth the squeeze, and for me, doing it all custom isn't worth it for my home projects.
I feel like this is one of those topics where compromise is futile. I use GitLab at work and use plain git on personal projects. I don't like spending time on tools that aren't either teaching me or paying me.
https://forgejo.org/compare-to-gitea/
Personally I thought Forgejo was doing better work on their actions runner for a while from casual changelog browsing but Gitea's been putting a lot of work into theirs. Otherwise it mostly still looks like a soft-fork in practice to me.
[0] Not that I'm thrilled with Gitea's semi-open-core setup and company but they make it seem like they're kicking puppies and dangling features over non-enterprise users head before snatching them away.
Is this something that has been happening for a while or a new trend due to LLM concerns? I understand the reasoning, it just made me do a double take because I haven't really seen that before.
Security researchers and malware authors would reverse engineer software updates of proprietary software, and scrutinise source code changes of open source projects to find secretly shipped security fixes.