From: smirzo@example.com
Salvador Mirzo writes:
> D writes:
>
>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2025, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>
>>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>>>> In comp.misc, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>> Indeed, so long as you block all FB's scripts and images on
>>>>> otherwise unrelated websites. Although I don't tend to make close
>>>>> friends so I don't need to worry about controlling their FB usage.
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't stop people from posting about you on FB. (Or worse, posting
>>>> photos of you on there.)
>>>
>>> What I don't tell, they can't post, and the same with what they
>>> don't photograph. Although I guess that does leave a bit of an
>>> information vacuum there which some nutcase could exploit to make
>>> up missing personal info/photos on me if they so desired.
>>>
>>>>> Quite mysteriously, all sorts of otherwise respectable open-source
>>>>> software developers are happy to use GitHub even though it's owned
>>>>> by M$. So even having ditched their software long ago, M$ are now
>>>>> very hard to avoid online if, ironically, you want to use, and
>>>>> especially work on, open-source software. I find that truely
>>>>> unfathomable, but others barely seem to see my problem with it.
>>>>
>>>> Many, I suspect, started using Github before Microsoft bought them in
>>>> 2018.
>>>
>>> For software projects I use, many more seem to have moved to there
>>> since 2018 than before. You'd think they like the M$ acquisition.
>>> Occasionally I object and am ignored.
>>
>> You have been heard! I will not be hosting my stuff on github. On the
>> other hand, I have nothing interesting to host, so perhaps a moot
>> point. ;) My home made scripts and little utilities live on my laptop
>> and sometimes on my server, and are shared upon request.
>
> I think most little scripts should be documented (with a manual) and put
> online. It will make it easier for others to use and it will certainly
> encourage others to improve it and share the improvement. So you could
> see your little script turn into a nice polished program simply because
> someone saw the idea and knew what to do to make it a lot better. Could
> be a good source of joy.
>
> One time I wrote a function---just a function---and added to some
> archive online. This was a pretty niche programming language. Years
> later, I looked it up---I was still called the author of the function,
> but the code was completely rewritten, with much more expertise
> knowledge. I thought it was ironic that my name was still there. We
> value the pioneer perhaps too much.
>
>>>> Lately I've been seeing people advocating for a switch to
>>>> Codeberg.
>>>
>>> I don't know about Codeberg, but there have been lots of
>>> alternatives all along. Tons of projects switched from SourceForge
>>> to GitHub. Many projects have their own websites too, so why not
>>> self-host? GitHub do offer a lot of extra features for free, but
>>> that's dealing with the devil IMHO. Especially as the more tied in
>>> to GitHub-specific systems a project gets, the less practical it is
>>> to move away if M$ get more greedy later on.
>>
>> I have heard about gitea. It seems as if it allows you to setup
>> graphical git hosting yourself. I personally use a fossil repository
>> accessible only over ssh. I don't use any of the wiki/ticket/chat
>> functionality included in it.
>
> There's Forgejo, too. It looks very good. Like in Github, you can
> disable all such modules---wiki, ticket system et cetera.
Sorry---you'd have to switch to git. I don't think Gitea or Forgejo
work with fossil. But fossil has its own web server, so you'd be fine
with it, too.
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
