Make XLibre repos on GitHub mirrors to selfhosted Gitea repos

[kapijawastaken]

Describe the feature

The xlibre repos would be selfhosted on gitea, and the current ones on GitHub would just be mirrors.

It should be implemented because

That would be ideal, because the project does not have to rely on GitHub, which is controlled by Microsoft, which could ban this repo because it doesnt fit their ideology.

What are the alternatives?

We could also scrap GitHub entirely, and not have any mirrors on GitHub.

Additional context

This would make the project more independent, and not reliant on M$ software.

Extra fields

• I have checked the existing issues
• I have read the Contributing Guidelines
• I'd like to work on this issue

[kkmzero]

There's one thing I would like to ask about. I run into one specific problem with self-hosted projects - if you have an issue you want resolved you need to create yet another account somewhere. My question is - isn't it better to stay on GitHub, at least for now, when there might be a lot of people interested in reporting/fixing a lot of bugs? When I had to deal with this problem in past I just gave up on sending in patches and bug reports.

I also don't understand why there are people creating issues about self-hosting without offering hosting of Gitea instance themselves or finding someone else who would be interested in providing it. Like, what is metux supposed to do? Just pay up for servers and then spend even more time working on the server-side of things - for free? It does not make any sense to me and it's wasting everyone's time. Do you also create issue tickets on other projects saying "Uhhhhm bro, you should definitely self-host.... uhm bro, no, just saying, I'm not going to facilitate the infrastructure lol."?

IF you are offering hosting, I very much apologize but it really wasn't obvious to me from reading what you wrote here.

[kapijawastaken]

I am not offering hosting, but I absolutely would if I had better hardware and the power bills werent so high.

[itamarperdomo]

why not just gitlab at gitlab.com using the open source program from their instance that provides ultimate fetures?

as @kkmzero said developers dont have time to deal with hosting issues so best way is to use services from providers.. github is owned by mocosoft .. we can spend their resources and use gitlab as real repos..

NOTE: gitea is a not so "libre" software as we know.. forgetto is much better and complete open source and free software at same time

[mckaygerhard]

This would make the project more independent, and not reliant on M$ software.

there is gitlab.com that is not M$ so .. also gitea is the same case as github.. its managed by a company in the shadows.. we have forgetto that is much close to open source and free softawre @kapijawastaken

[kapijawastaken]

I didnt actually know gitea was managed by a company, this is a surprise to me.

[mckaygerhard]

I didnt actually know gitea was managed by a company, this is a surprise to me.

it was forked to forgetto .. https://forgejo.org/ but now an independient project

[xgui4]

great idea ! but i would contributing work ? with a mailing list ?

[ToneyFoxxy]

Counter-argument: Just make mirrors of this repo anywhere you want to, the more the merrier

[itamarperdomo]

Counter-argument: github is not 100% free software, forgetto is 100% free software, Xlibre born due companies controlled everighint by 3rth party members right? well github is also a control tool. right? @ToneyFoxxy

Counter-argument: Just make mirrors of this repo anywhere you want to, the more the merrier

N: codeberg is a hosting service on top of forgetto

[xgui4]

Counter-argument: github is not 100% free software, forgetto is 100% free software, Xlibre born due companies controlled everighint by 3rth party members right? well github is also a control tool. right? @ToneyFoxxy

Counter-argument: Just make mirrors of this repo anywhere you want to, the more the merrier

N: codeberg is a hosting service on top of forgetto

counter argument
codeberg is extreme left and want to fight "right wing force" , this is not combatible with xlibre. lunduke have already talk about this , on how woke and "antifa" (but that does mean communist) is codeberg

[kapijawastaken]

@xgui4 i think he already meant to say we shouldnt use codeberg

[jormundgand]

I already have a gitea instance running on server at home. It's by no means a fast machine so this in itself might be good reason to reject the offer, but I would be willing to host a gitforge to serve xlibre. I expect to upgrade the hardware soon(tm) so the performance issues might be less of a problem in the future. It's running 24/7 anyway, so it's not costing me anything to host xlibre there as well.

Replacing gitea with something else has been on my todo list for a while, so it's not set in stone that it has to be gitea. I could start by setting up a mirro of the github repos, if anyone thinks that's a good idea.

[mckaygerhard]

Replacing gitea with something else has been on my todo list for a while, so it's not set in stone that it has to be gitea. I could start by setting up a mirro of the github repos, if anyone thinks that's a good idea.

better idea.. good starting point.. by the way gitea is managed in the shadows by corporate way.. just like happened with X11 originally... i always prefers a communist way of the project so community really rule the project

[mckaygerhard]

we cannot use something that have a root in authority, like gitea, the path of the project of xorg is determined primary by the needs of enterprices.. and then when that featured integrates makes happy the bussines man.. its releases in open source version..

X11libre borns due that behaviour is close to authoratian, becouse such "feature" was not wanted by communty.. so if you are enought madure the following is deterministic:

sorry @xgui4 but that is your personal opinion.. unfortunately community is a word that like communist both derives from French communiste, from commun (Old French comun "common, general, free, open, public;" see common

so based on all i said.. we need to choose components and artifacts that are not enterprise ruled!

[mckaygerhard]

in any case.. as @kkmzero said developers dont have time to deal with hosting issues means that own hosting platforms is not the idean right now! so maybe best its to use the github resources to do not waste own ones.. so this issue must be closed cos there is no options currently due the hard work ahead

The idea being objected to is that a group you disagree with can give your "consent" because you voted and lost. This was the argument the founders of the united states used, when they rejected democracy in favor of a republic. They also argued that we should continue as largely agrarian, as that would ensure individual independence, and further avoid "mob rule".

interesting way to argue, but community is a form of the massive participation and democracy only support the majority that means wil be a minority suppressed! and only do git management in a real community driven (and not democracy one like happned with original xorg)

and just to be clear.. @xgui4 your opinion is not technicall and commutity meaning is very close to the things you hated, its based in participation.. not in mayority of votes (democracy)

currently we have github.. and gitea is just the same.. company in the shadows..

[callmetango]

Hello @xgui4, I once more ask you to stop talking about politics in the issues section. Here we strongly focus on technical and organizational aspects. For political discussions there is the X11Libre Miscellaneous · Discussions · GitHub.

That is a fact you already know and have been told many times before. Since you don't seem to care, we have to take care and consider blocking you.

So once again: Please stay on topic. This is warning 1 out of 3.

[callmetango]

Thank you very much for your contributions! We were considering hosting our infrastructure on our own servers from the very beginning of this project.

Since this is a discussion about ideas it will be moved to X11Libre 4 Good Ideas For Later · Discussions · GitHub. There are already other good discussions and we will consolidate them all as time permits.

[takagemacoed]

Migration of a fairly young project from the most popular one to the least popular is just simply killing the project.
It create troublesome to ALL the current contributors that want to participate to the project.
They ALL have to adapt to the new environment.
Also it make the project hard to be discovered by other potential contributors.

Github is the best place for alienated project to gain traction because of its popularity.
I don't think doing this in this early stage is a good idea.

I think metux migrate to github not becasue freedesktop could ban his repo. It's because metux was already banned from freedesktop.
Seeing that this repo have already migrated to github for nearly 2 months, the chances that it will be banned by github is minimal.

[callmetango]

Yes, exactly. Github is the right place right now as you said. What we are considering is to mirror the Github project to somewhere or some somewhere to Github. To have a backup or even master in our own hands.

[xgui4]

i agree, having a mirror elsewhere can be good if ms want to kill this project but migrating elsewhere will potentially kill the project. and github is popular so this is perfect. maybe gitlab ?