1. Who wants this feature? Personal gitea user / Companies with private gitea / Git hosting website via gitea or others?
2. Why they need this feature?
3. How they want to use this feature?
Maybe you can help them and provide the answers.
@humanetech As a gitea user, I have those 3 questions.
I can't see a single use case where this makes _any_ sense whatsoever.
Git is already decentralized. A web frontend is a convenience, not a requirement.
You can host your own gitea on your own machine already - and with git's decentralization ... yeah I just don't see where this request is coming from.
What use case do you have that this would solve?
The current situation is that to interact with a repo hosted on a forge like Gitea or GitLab or githu8 etc. you need to have an account there. Each forge website is a separate island.
If you host your own forge, you get to make the rules etc. but you're isolated. It's harder to find you. Many people worry they'd get less contributions if they left githu8. It would also require contributors to create an account on each forge.
And githu8 is proprietary and centralized and isn't a community project by the people for the people.
You're looking at _attracting people already using github_ to a different software, hoping to entice them to leave by removing the burden of "visibility." Not sure that's ... a big enough selling point
I'm afraid that people who are on github already just don't care enough about freedom and so on (likely have no opinion on licenses, aren't really concerned if their code is used for imprisoning children or taking lands away from indigenous peoples, and certainly aren't worried if it runs on OpenBSD.) So I'm fairly sure that's a deadend also.
I'd suggest, instead, just making the software work. Gitea does that. If, by adding federation - and finding a way to prevent the problem of bad actors inserting code more easily - you can create a better system that meets the needs of some - great.
But please don't push for that to be the default.
> my god this is the worst idea
We have github, gitlab, gitea, gogs and others. They are more than just git. People are free to choose the package and to self-host. There are countless repo's, 1,000's of instances. This is fragmented right now. You need to create accounts everywhere and manage them somehow. Email is just for notification, nothing more. With forgefed you have same control of bad actors, nothing changes.
This shows good forgefed intro + usecases is needed.
It's not about attracting anyone. Even if we all hosted our own free software forges, these forges would be isolated from each other. In the current situation we can get social/community features, or decentralization, but not both.
Email is decentralized, but web forges aren't yet. With ForgeFed, web forges would be decentralized too.
Just to clarify, I'm not making claims about how things ought to be. Just creating something that can connect forges into a bigger network, the Fediverse.
We don't control the actions of other people. But we can make them a door, and they get to choose whether or not they want to walk through it. ForgeFed is such a door.
The idea is that your project's visibility and access to it won't depend on whether the user's account is on your forge or some other forge. You can create one account and participate everywhere. Project search, discovery, recommendations, etc. find stuff from the whole network. No single forge has more power over users than any other.
- Orgs/teams/groups can include users from different forges
- You can push commits to repos on different forges
- You can open issues, open merge requests, comment, send code review, etc. across forges
- Repos, CI servers, wikis, issue trackers etc. can be on different servers and still seamlessly work together
That is such a nightmarish scenario from the perspective of someone wanting to collaborate with others on code that I can
Aside from the part where this is already addressed by git in the first place (decentralized, can use mail for everything you said) and then the overhead and management of ...
You've taken "writing code and collaboration" and injected "middle management" into it.
This would reduce
As far as visibility goes, I'm sorry, I don't see this at all. If people...
no I'm still back at middle management being inserted into every project on the planet and I just... this is soul-crushing in how wrong it is.
And then there's the injection of code from bad actors, and the... my god this is the worst idea
> What use case do you have that this would solve?
Issue tracker collaboration. Code collaboration, as you rightly point out, is already taken care of by #git.
As to whether #ActivityPub is anywhere near the right protocol for that, I have my reservations as well. I reckon that #email, #XMPP or #git itself could be used to achieve the same result with less effort.
Having managed projects, and watched a lot of projects be completely mismanaged because many people do not know how to communicate using computers - look at the current uproar surrounding whether people can continue to work with GNU because of RMS (which is why I won't - well, that, and Gnu folks tend to be just absolutely impossible to work with ) I'd caution on "requiring" that.
It's fine to have it as a possibility.
Additionally, while these have become one of the most significant ways to discover software - they're not the only way. I'd also argue that "most significant" is quite a misnomer, considering Apple's "only software from the Apple store," the Steam storefront, and so on - software shops, not code repositories - are how PEOPLE discover things.
Coders may. (I find more via suggestions and seeing what people work on/with.)
Not sure on designers, managers, end users...
@humanetech Thanks for the heads-up, I wanted to share my thoughts there before, and totally forget about it, now I did ;)
im not sure why this is news, or why a new git-tea ticket was opened - there was already an open git-tea ticket discussing forge-fed integration - as gitlab was also mentioned though, i could add for completeness, that pagure, gitlab, git-tea, and gogs, all have analogous tickets, which have been open since around 2018
exactly this. I read in some recent forgefed discussion (couldn't find link anymore) that devs at gitea (and gitlab) were not yet warming to adoption. If you are not part of the fediverse it is hard to gauge its momentum and see value of AP support. On this issue they asked feedback, but so far only 1 person responded.
1. Me! (A person who wants to comment, commit to and create issues (I.e. collaborate) with different projects)
2. I really don't want to make an account for each project... I've already had a couple times where I didn't make an interaction because I couldn't bear making another account.
3. I basically don't want to see it. Just want seemless travel between the independent instances.
1. Me! Desperately! As a regular user and contributor to a number of projects.
2. I don't want to have to visit a ton of different sites to keep up with the projects I'm interested in. I want to just have things available where I already check in regularly... here on the Fediverse.
3. I want to be able to follow patches, commits, issues and/or comments those issues using my already existing fediverse accounts and see the changes posted to my timeline.
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!