On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:08:53 +0300 Reco <recovery...@enotuniq.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 08:01:58AM -0400, Celejar wrote: > > > Github (Gitlab, Sourceforge, etc) were and are non-free (as in - > > > non-gratis) services, so it's only reasonable to stay away from them > > > regardless of whom is controlling them. > > > > What do you mean by calling them non-gratis services? I know that some > > of their services are non-gratis, but basic code hosting certainly is > > gratis. > > You do not pay for these services, yet they provide them to you and > everyone else (with certain exclusions). > Guess who is the product here? The answer is - you are the product. > Payment involving money is not the only kind of payment that you can > make today. I think that's an unreasonable definition of gratis and non-gratis. If a FLOSS dev gets an ego boost, or even some sort of spiritual satisfaction, from people using his software, does that mean it's non-gratis? > > > You need to be in control of your code - *you* host it. Always was, > > > always is. It's not that hard anyway. > > > > If you maintain a local copy of your code and just push it to Github > > for serving it publicly (which is what I do, and what I assume most > > developers do), you haven't lost control of your code > > And then you take out your Github repository in compliance with DMCA > claim (bonus points for false DMCA claim). > Whoops - suddenly you've lost a chunk of your userbase, possibly > - some of your contributors, bug reports, CI/CD pipeline, and that's a > non-exhaustive list. Those are certainly legitimate concerns, although none of that really means that you're "not in control of your code." I see that you yourself acknowledge this below. > > - if / when the host does anything you don't like, you take the > > existing code and make it available elsewhere, and stop posting future > > code to the offending service. (It'll still have a copy of any > > existing code, of course - but that's inevitable with FLOSS software > > regardless of where you host it.) > > But the "code" aka git repository is not the only thing that's provided > by such companies, and the temptation to use these other services (that > are also provided "free" of charge) is way too great for the most. > > You've kept your code in the scenario above, but what good did it gave > you? > > > I don't argue that there are "safe" ways of using these services > (aforementioned "code dump" is one of them). Problem is - if the risks > of using these services need to be explained to the participants of > debian-user - it's not possible to explain the same to the happy GitHub > crowd. We are in basic agreement. I'm not really a "developer" - I just host some relatively simple projects on Github. I agree that a deeper use of something like Github is something I'd have to carefully consider. Celejar
