earlwarren, 4 months ago

@Mehrad @forgejo @Codeberg In the past year Forgejo indeed grew to be its own thing in many ways.

I will dedicate most of my contribution time this year (1400 hours give or take, same as 2023) to implement federation and data portability.

IMHO it is, by far, the most important feature any forge must have. If people want to join and help, it will happen faster. 🙏

There are so many details that need to be taken care of. 😅

chrysn, 5 months ago

@Mehrad Is not not? The comparison page you link on the @forgejo webpage still says it's soft, and last time I saw this discussed on https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo:matrix.org on January 3rd it sounded pretty much like it's still a soft fork.
Stars should still go to Forgejo, if you're participating in that game :-)

Mehrad, 5 months ago

@chrysn

Thanks for the comment, You might be partly correct, but:

> Forgejo was initially presented as a “soft-fork” of Gitea

Emphasis on "initially"

It then continues:

> It is however better described as a product built on top of Gitea, Git and hundreds of other Free Software projects.

Also:

> Forgejo exclusively develops software and documentation published under Free Software licenses. Gitea is Open Core and develops software that is not published under a Free Software license.
🧵 👇🏼

Mehrad, 5 months ago

🧵 👆🏼
@chrysn
But these said, it is not "hard fork" either:

https://forgejo.org/compare/#will-forgejo-become-a-hard-fork-of-gitea

I don't know how to call this type of forking, but as far as my understanding goes, it closely follows Gitea but the development, release cycles, security patches, and etc. are fully independent.

Mehrad, 5 months ago

@chrysn
I changed the first sentence of my first toot to be more accurate:

From "is not a soft-fork" to "is not a simple soft-fork".

Thanks again for pointing it out.