GitHub is a Microsoft-owned corporate walled garden, actively working to monopolize the space.
Gitlab, while huge, has a great, full-featured FLOSS version for self-hosting that is also a first-class citizen as far as their handling of technical issues is concerned. Plus, they are at least talking about a federated protocol:
We don't! A big mission is to spread awareness that #GitHub is not the gold standard for code development. Still, many platforms require either GitHub or GitLab accounts (e.g. for proof of owning a piece of code // being maintainer of something). We think this is not fair, you should be free to choose your place to develop code!
Still, we see many people complain about the GitLab.com service being behind #Cloudflare, taking intransparent decisions, and it's still a commercial product after all.
We won't give a statement if we consider them better than GitHub or not, but we'll be working hard to offer a viable alternative to everyone who wants to avoid both of them for whatever reason.
@codeberg yes, I understand all of this.
But if you're talking about gitlab.com, why not be clear about it and say "gitlab.com", instead of effectively painting any and all Gitlab instances (like the amazing 0xacab.org, for example) with the same broad brush?
@rysiek Where did we paint any GitLab instance by saying that it should not be required to use them?
I'll happily paint us with the same brush: No one should be forced to use Codeberg, it's perfectly fine to use anything you like. You can also send your patches via E-Mail or use another VCS.
Diversity matters. Freedom matters. We're aiming at offering freedome, not at creating another trap.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!