Would be nice to see federated PRs. Git is distributed after all!
this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
89 points (96.8% liked)
Programming
24415 readers
467 users here now
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
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
https://radicle.xyz/ seems interesting in this regard, though I haven’t found the time to look too deeply into it yet
This looks neat, so the repositories are distributed across the people who run the radicale nodes? I've been self hosting forgejo for a while, wouldn't mind trying this out just for fun.
That’s my understanding yeah. Another neat thing if I’m reading things right is that the equivalent of issues and reviews and PRs are stored as git objects in the repo itself, so distributing the repo also distributes the “metadata” surrounding it that is invisible to git when the repo is hosted on github, gitlab, forgejo, etc.
I know the solution. Starting this year, students will be forced to contribute to a project they use, care about or, at the very least, truly want to use in the long term. Not one they found randomly on Github.
And they're still going to find things on GitHub. Because so many things are on GitHub.
They're blaming the students for the popularity of GitHub. If they want students to not use GitHub then just make that a requirement.
PSA: GitHub does not have a monopoly, you are free to host your stuff elsewhere (or yourself)
Google "network effect"
Relatively minor for source code forges.
The reasons everyone uses GitHub:
- Free, even for private repos. No ads.
- Free CI - this is huge. Nobody else does this because it costs Microsoft around $100m/year to provide.
- It's quite good.
If anyone can ever compete with that then I doubt network effects will keep people there.
Codeberg has free CI if your project has a FOSS license and a readme: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg-e.V./requests#woodpecker-ci
They're clearly not going to be able to afford $100m/year in free CI.
Which is one of the reasons behind github's network effect.
That's not a network effect.
I said its one of the reasons behind the network effect, not the network effect itself. github can offer more freebies, which attracts more users, which makes it more attractive to other users and for existing users to stick around.
Yes, and for most of us it's easy to do so, but I'm not going to explain a noob how to add new repositories. I mean, I did, and I will do in the future, but it's not my favorite task to do.
I realized my comment was a bit ambiguous. I meant repositories like for Maven, NPM, or package managers. Having stuff on GitHub makes it a lot easier.
Terrible title. The article is about the risks of everyone using GitHub. That doesn't mean GitHub is destroying the open source ecosystem. In fact it's the complete opposite - GitHub massively helps the open source ecosystem. That's why everyone uses it in the first place!
Not quite. GitHub used to help the open source ecosystem. Since it's been taken over by Micro$lop it's gradually been shifting towards exploiting it.
Maybe slightly, but it's still way on the helping side.
Sounds more like it became a trojan horse.