[HN Gopher] Kyoto framework is moving to sr.ht from GitHub
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Kyoto framework is moving to sr.ht from GitHub
        
       Author : gkbrk
       Score  : 71 points
       Date   : 2022-07-02 18:56 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | newaccount2021 wrote:
       | last night I checked my billing page on sr.ht and there was a
       | line chart that had "11.2%" to indicate that currently 11.2% of
       | users are paying...there was also a redline at 13% which I assume
       | is some sustainability threshold
       | 
       | if you want viable alternatives to github, pay up!
       | 
       | sr.ht is a nice service that allows some premium features like
       | ssh'ing into ci instances to check failures...there is plenty
       | worth paying for
        
         | ok_dad wrote:
         | The red line is at 13.37 percent, so I assume it's a semi-joke.
         | 
         | You can read about the 2021 financials here; it seems that the
         | project is pretty successful overall:
         | https://sourcehut.org/blog/2022-04-08-2021-financial-report/
        
           | ddevault wrote:
           | Yeah, it's just a joke. SourceHut is already profitable &
           | sustainable. But, I think that it is important that we
           | establish the expectation that users should be paying for the
           | service. It keeps our interests aligned directly with theirs
           | and we are accountable to no one else.
        
       | 8organicbits wrote:
       | > As far as a go packaging system makes host changing painful
       | enough, there is no chance to keep old versions on the new host.
       | 
       | > If you're using version 0.x, please, make a fork, or create a
       | local project copy.
       | 
       | I feel like an official mirror on GitHub would be cleaner, as the
       | old URLs could still work, but I suppose that doesn't match the
       | vision.
        
         | bbkane wrote:
         | If you're starting a new Go project, I strongly recommend using
         | a custom import path- I host go.bbkane.com with GitHub Pages
         | and it was easy and free to set up with vangen and GitHub Pages
         | (I already own bbkane.com).
         | 
         | https://github.com/bbkane/go.bbkane.com
        
       | Nextgrid wrote:
       | I wish Sourcehut displayed code on the repo's primary page (as
       | opposed to a separate "tree" tab) like most mainstream services
       | such as GitHub or GitLab.
        
       | quadrifoliate wrote:
       | In another of the get-off-GitHub discussions recently, I
       | mentioned to another FOSS project leader that they should
       | consider taking their projects off GitHub to a forge that
       | respects FOSS licenses. Sourcehut was one of the suggestions in
       | addition to GitLab.
       | 
       | I'm glad to see that some projects are leading the way in this
       | direction. To me, this move shows that the devs are competent and
       | not afraid of migrations away from legacy forges if necessary;
       | similar to how people moved from Sourceforge to GitHub 10 years
       | ago.
       | 
       | I'll keep Kyoto framework in mind if need an SSR frontend
       | framework in the future! I suggest others do the same.
       | 
       | ----------------------------------------
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31941568
        
       | swagonomixxx wrote:
       | Just had this thought: are there any decentralized code hosting
       | services?
       | 
       | To me, I don't really see a difference between GitHub and sr.ht.
       | Companies can start out with these "friendly" attitudes towards
       | FOSS, but when they reel in many paying customers, they can
       | pretty easily, and without consequence, change their policies to
       | be more aggressive (geared towards profit) and greedy. It just
       | seems inevitable to me.
       | 
       | However, decentralized hosting and governance might make it so
       | that there can't be a hostile takeover and incorrect (relative to
       | license) usage of FOSS code. I'm thinking something akin to IPFS
       | but more specialized towards e.g git repository hosting.
       | 
       | Not sure how such hosting would be feasible in terms of breaking
       | even between hosting costs, but a decentralized service hosting
       | distributed VCS databases seems more along the lines of the
       | philosophy of DVCS's in general. DVCS's in general do not have
       | timeliness requirements (i.e your "git push" most of the time
       | doesn't have to propagate worldwide immediately) and the other
       | goodies that come with being on GitHub (e.g CI/CD) seem
       | orthogonal to the actual code hosting itself, and I don't see why
       | that can't be built separately without being part of the service.
        
         | miohtama wrote:
         | Radicle is a decentralised Github alternative to the point it
         | does not have any centralised servers. However, because of
         | "web3" many people here on HackerNews might not take it
         | seriously, even thought it might deserve a closer look.
         | 
         | https://radicle.xyz/
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | As long as it's P2P without involving any cryptocurrencies, I
           | don't see why you'd label it "Web3"?
           | 
           | Edit: seems Ethereum is a opt-in optional part of Radicle, so
           | I see how people could believe it to be a part of the whole
           | "Web3" effort.
           | 
           | Well, as long as I can run it without Ethereum, I'm happy.
        
             | miohtama wrote:
             | It literally says Web3 on the second heading of the landing
             | page.
        
               | capableweb wrote:
               | As my edit mentions, seems at least that part is opt-in
               | rather than a core of the protocol. So you can use it
               | without "Web3" if you want.
        
         | rychco wrote:
         | I don't know Drew DeVault personally, but I feel from his blog
         | that he's fairly transparent and not interested in attempting
         | to squeeze out every possible cent of profit from sourcehut. I
         | may be proven wrong in the future, but for now I'm happy with
         | the service and hopeful that it will remain affordable,
         | friendly, and fast.
        
         | mbreese wrote:
         | Git itself is decentralized. It is entirely agnostic from a
         | centralized/decentralized point of view. We tend to centralize
         | things to make life easier. Who wants to pull updates from each
         | contributor as opposed to a hub?
         | 
         | So the real question is -- what are the features of GitHub
         | would you like to see decentralized? CI? Issues? Wikis?
         | Because, you can self host many of these with gitea, GitLab, or
         | sr.ht. That's the best kind of decentralization, but it does
         | add to your own personal overhead (maintenance, backups), and
         | really limits discovery.
         | 
         | I think what you might be asking for is if there is a federated
         | code repository that supports git. That's an interesting
         | question, and I don't know if such a thing yet exists.
        
         | ranaexmachina wrote:
         | > To me, I don't really see a difference between GitHub and
         | sr.ht. Companies can start out with these "friendly" attitudes
         | towards FOSS, but when they reel in many paying customers, they
         | can pretty easily, and without consequence, change their
         | policies to be more aggressive (geared towards profit) and
         | greedy. It just seems inevitable to me.
         | 
         | But with sourcehut you can just host it yourself or find
         | someone else who hosts that as everything is FOSS.
         | 
         | If you don't want to use the built-in CI, wiki and issue
         | tracker, then Git is already decentralized. You can push and
         | pull easily from and to multiple sources. Git is already built
         | for that exact use case.
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | > If you don't want to use the built-in CI, wiki and issue
           | tracker, then Git is already decentralized. You can push and
           | pull easily from and to multiple sources. Git is already
           | built for that exact use case.
           | 
           | Git is a great protocol. You can pull/push to HTTPS servers,
           | SSH servers, even directories (so via NFS if you so wish).
           | Really, Git is really awesome in that way.
           | 
           | But Git itself is not a "code hosting service" that parent
           | asked for. That requires more. Something like Fossil SCM
           | would probably fit better, or git-ssb as I mentioned in
           | another comment here.
        
         | goodpoint wrote:
         | > I don't really see a difference between GitHub and sr.ht.
         | Companies can start out with these "friendly" attitudes towards
         | FOSS
         | 
         | You are really comparing DeVault with, of all companies,
         | microsoft?
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | git-ssb is really nice for decentralized hosting between
         | friends. Uses Secure Scuttlebutt (https://scuttlebutt.nz/) and
         | I've used it for over a year to collaborate on projects with
         | people over ssb.
         | 
         | I'm a bit scared of putting this link here, as the gateway is
         | not super reliable, so I'll ask people who are curious, to get
         | ssb running locally and pull down the data if they want to look
         | into it deeper.
         | 
         | But regardless, here is the link for the curious minds who
         | can't wait, it's the repository for git-ssb itself:
         | https://git.scuttlebot.io/%254Dsh92G6zkkLnR3%2Fys%2Fv42MD0jK...
         | 
         | If you get server errors, jump on ssb yourself, or wait some
         | seconds/minutes and refresh. Be kind to the poor server.
        
         | sergiotapia wrote:
         | Drew Devault is /g/ incarnate. He won't ever do any bullshit to
         | people using the services. If anything he would just as well
         | burn it all to the ground.
        
         | ddevault wrote:
         | Founder of sr.ht here. I understand these fears, and I have
         | gone to great lengths to give users tangible assurances in this
         | regard. Trust is something that has to be earned, and it is
         | incredibly important to me that we are worthy of yours.
         | 
         | For a start, the company is bootstrapped and we have no private
         | investors. The revenue to maintain the platform comes directly
         | from users, and all users are expected to pay if they have the
         | means for this reason. We are accountable only to them and we
         | do not have to find "creative" ways to monetize them (or their
         | work) because they are already footing the bill themselves.
         | Every cent paid by users stays in open source, either
         | supporting the platform or the dozens of projects our engineers
         | maintain or contribute to in the FOSS ecosystem.
         | 
         | We also seek to be as transparent as possible. Our financial
         | reports, monitoring system & alarms, security reporting,
         | operational documentation, backups, and so on, is all publicly
         | available. We have hard data that you can use to understand our
         | platform's sustainability, security, performance, uptime, and
         | more.
         | 
         | And, unlike GitHub (and GitLab), SourceHut is 100% bona-fide
         | free software, mostly AGPL. You can run it on your own servers,
         | and we make it easy to import and export your data, in
         | standard, interoperable formats that you can use to move
         | between instances or even between software stacks, such as GNU
         | Mailman or other solutions. SourceHut is also not an ivory
         | tower -- we elevate our users to peers, and many parts of our
         | system are officially maintained by independent volunteers.
         | 
         | I work really hard for our user's trust and I'm proud to know
         | that I have it. If anyone has questions or concerns, I'm always
         | prepared to listen to them and do what it takes to make sure
         | our users are confident in the platform. FOSS is my life's
         | passion and I am committed to doing it right.
        
         | johnny22 wrote:
         | I wouldn't want to use any decentralized system for code if
         | there's no discovery, code search, cross instance logins, AND
         | BACKUPS.
         | 
         | It'd suck to end up in a situation like you see with torrents,
         | where there are tons of references, but no access to the data.
         | 
         | I can imagine tons of useful code being lost over time that
         | way.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | morpheuskafka wrote:
         | I don't know the backstory with the sr.ht founder or anything,
         | but I think there is a difference. GitHub always started out as
         | a for-profit company, albeit targeting the market of FOSS
         | developers/communities, and had a closed-source product sold
         | for on-prem use. Sourcehut is itself FOSS software from the
         | beginning and has its own developer community, so it is a
         | little different.
        
       | Shadonototra wrote:
       | I approve the move, congrats!
        
       | andybak wrote:
       | If there's a big migration away from Github then I really worry
       | what I'll do about discovering interesting stuff. I spend an hour
       | or so a week looking through my Github feed. Something genuinely
       | valuable will be lost once that is no longer a rich seam of new
       | repos.
        
       | 202206241203 wrote:
       | These things are like "Why I left Google" from 2010s.
        
       | sergiotapia wrote:
       | I left Codeplex many years ago. I could easily leave Github as
       | well, in fact I'll do that over the weekend.
       | 
       | This article was pretty eye-opening.
       | https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/
        
       | capableweb wrote:
       | The title confused me at first, "they are moving from sr.ht to
       | GitHub?", but then I realized I'm just used to reading migrations
       | like that in a "from $serviceB to $serviceA" manner and "to
       | $serviceA from $serviceB" made it all wrong in my brain. Funny
       | how that works.
        
         | 29athrowaway wrote:
         | You will love the Intel assembly dialect.
        
         | phdelightful wrote:
         | I like "from A to B" because B happens after A temporally and
         | in the text. It also serves to emphasize A as opposed to B,
         | which is nice because we usually wouldn't leave A unless there
         | was really a problem with it even if B is better in some way.
        
         | phnofive wrote:
         | Had the same reaction - skipping prepositions and mashing the
         | nouns into a trained interpretive mold. Guess I need to slow
         | down.
        
       | gigatexal wrote:
       | Yikes. Mailing list development might work for Linus and the
       | kernel team but the PR approach on GitHub is so much easier for
       | developers to discover and use and even for senior or more
       | seasoned devs I'd rather do this in the open on a PR than in some
       | mailing list. Ugh.
        
         | morpheuskafka wrote:
         | There's a huge middle ground of running your own instance of
         | Gitlab/etc. versus going to the mailing list style of
         | development (even that could be a lot easier with a more
         | readable web interface and web posting support).
        
         | shp0ngle wrote:
         | I think the mailing list approach would work for giant projects
         | that have many bullshit PRs and issues, and you want to deter
         | the "hello please fix it on my pc" stuff. Not really for small
         | projects where each PR is usually helpful.
         | 
         | I have no idea what is kyoto and if it fits there.
        
         | meibo wrote:
         | Yeah, I was reading this and thought "Have fun!":
         | 
         | > I don't know much about it, but I'm going to dig into it in
         | the near future (https://man.sr.ht/lists.sr.ht/). For now,
         | those who want to contribute, I'll just add read/write
         | permissions to the project.
        
       | markphip wrote:
       | FWIW, just as Amazon and SalesForce are already doing their
       | version of CoPilot, there is nothing to prevent GitHub from
       | training its models off open source that is hosted on sr.ht or
       | GitLab or anywhere else. If it is open source then the source is
       | going to be available to be used for the models.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-02 23:00 UTC)