Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
I really wish more FOSS projects would move off of GitHub. It feels wrong just having an account just so I can contribute. Hopefully horrible "features" like this encourages others to migrate.
> Decentralized protocol implemented by Torvalds himself
> Community gravitates around one decent website
> Microsoft buys that website
This is why we can't have nice things.
The worse it gets, the faster the migration rate becomes.
I have a library that has over 2 Million downloads in pip. How do you switch from github to codeberg (or any other git)? I just dont want to break things for everyone :)
You can start by moving your development workflows (pull requests, issue tracking, etc.) to something like codeberg. You can continue publishing your PyPI package from Github by just pushing your code from codeberg to Github.
Eventually you can also move the publishing pipeline over as well. I don’t know how complicated your library is, of course, but in simplest cases it’s a matter of rewriting a config file in a slightly different way.
I mean, if Zig and Guix can do it. It's possible.
I'm in a similar boat. So far:
Next I gotta update the readme on GitHub telling everyone that I'm going to move to Codeberg. I'll let that sit for a few months.
Also, I gotta update consumers like homebrew to consume from Codeberg instead.
I was gonna close/merge any open PRs on GitHub.
Issues, I'm not totally sure about. I thought I read there was a way to migrate those. Although, I'm kiiinda ok with starting fresh........ not totally sure this part needs more thought.
Once the Codeberg repo is ready, I'll make the GitHub repo read-only, with the readme pointing to Codeberg.
Way, way, way down the line, I'd consider deleting the GitHub repo (and finally my account).
I'm OK with breaking things. I'm gonna try my hardest to not break stuff, but I'm not going to let the fear of breaking stuff prevent me from getting on ShitHub by Macroslop.
How did you get the CI working in codeberg? last time I checked, you had to get permission to do so(?). I would love to switch when I have time.
You do have to ask for permission. https://docs.codeberg.org/ci/
Asking permission involves creating an issue on the Codeberg-e.V./requests repo: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg-e.V./requests/issues/new?template=ISSUE_TEMPLATE%2FWoodpecker-CI.yaml
Here's an example issue asking permission for CI: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg-e.V./requests/issues/1663
They get back to you fairly quickly. I think the main thing they check for is if your project is FOSS. They don't seem very strict otherwise.
After you get permission, you can go to https://ci.codeberg.org/login to access CI.
You'll also need to create a .woodpecker folder in your repo.
Woodpecker docs are here: https://woodpecker-ci.org/docs/usage/intro
# .woodpecker/my-first-workflow.yaml
when:
- event: push
branch: main
steps:
- name: build
image: debian
commands:
- echo "This is the build step"
- echo "binary-data-123" > executable
- name: a-test-step
image: golang:1.16
commands:
- echo "Testing ..."
- ./executable
I think you would clone the repo and continue with codeberg. Announce wherever you can, and continue any new work at the new repo.
explain how you contribute with out an account? is there a hosting service that lets you do that?
In case, you're not aware, you can also email the dev. You can code up your commits as normal and then use e.g. git format-patch -3 to put the last 3 commits patch files. You can then attach those files to an e-mail and the dev can apply those patches with git am.
It takes a bit of playing around, but it's actually really easy.
The Linux kernel, one of the most complex projects on the planet, develops like this.
I currently have a GitHub account in order to contribute to projects hosted on GitHub, because I don't think there is currently a way possible to do thinks like open up an issue without an account.
This is fucking hilarious.
It rewrites the description so unless you view the in app edit history it looks like you are endorsing this ad!
Who the fuck shipped this lol
Microslop
Yeah, I might block a contributor on sight, if they post something like that.
Yeah, this was always the next obvious booster stage on the Slop Rocket.
March 30, 2026 @ 10:45 AM EST: Martin Woodward, Vice President of Developer Relations at GitHub, confimed that Copilot was injecting product tips into pull requests but that the feature has been disabled following feedback.
They posted an update to the article about this recent update. After feedback, they decided to disable this feature.
It'll be back. They'll just wait a little longer to fully implement it.
Eventually it will be This feature can only be disabled on Enterprise or Pro+ plans
Thats a bingo
They were successful because of VC funding, we were doomed from the start. VCs want one thing and one thing only, to back a Unicorn. Nothing else matters to them.
Aren't they owned by Microslop?
Yes, it was a Unicorn that Microslop bought.
Makes it easier to recognize the slop
takes deep breath
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Tha fuq?
Not even labeled as an ad/sponsored content/influenced "tip"/suggestion.
I’m in the process of switching to my own Forgejo instance. It’s been pretty easy so far.
Yeah I like it quite a bit.
Next will be weaponized ads.
These are weaponized ads.
Pay now or the trigger pulls!
Drink a verification can
Isn't this what claude also does?