You don’t need git alternatives. git has nothing to do with fascistsoft. Please don’t confuse a repo hosting service with the (FOSS) tools used thereon.
Alternative for github: codeberg.org
Alternative for github: codeberg.org
only for
publicFOSSPartially true, yes, that is a downside: codeberg currently does not allow non-free licenses. But no, a repository does not have to be public.
Why is that a bad thing ?
It is not a bad thing.
The comment claimed “alternative to GitHub”. I pointed out that it’s an alternative for only a subset of use cases/projects. Without that clarification, someone may explore or follow through and be disappointed.
Gitlab, next question
git is decentralized and I have never used it professionally.
If you don’t like merge requests, feel free to fork the project and do something. Merge requests are good because they give responsibilities and a trace of what was done. Do you have an alternative for this?
git sucks but you can use Jujutsu, it’s great. Fossil and Pijul are not alternatives, they are incompatible in that case.
Anyway you’re focusing too much on github when there are alternatives already, and some of them were already available 20 years ago when github did not exist.
Your rant is confusing because you want to throw everything away and stop using useful tools.
Fossil & Pijul do have merging though. Also Fossil has a UI, WebServer & Github-like features built into it.
If you talk about version control: https://alternativeto.net/software/git/
Git != GitHub though.
