Re: [Flightgear-devel] Suggestion for a 737-family repository in FG GitLab

[Nia <fl...@sy...>]

I do agree that forgejo, at the current point in time, isn't the best 
choice. (despite it being my personal preference!)
As for discoverability? IMO that's a non-argument! If you want users to 
discover it? The code forge is the wrong place! they will discover it 
via the default hangar. And for developers? Having it next to the core 
project would increase the discoverability of the "correct" fork... if 
you search rn on github, you'll find many forks, which one to contribute 
to? Which one doesn't have problematic GPL violations in it?... A 
central place would offer a easily discoverable place.
The ease of collaboration has nothing to do with what people are used 
to! It has to do with what does a better job... and imo, the core 
functionality is there in all the named examples.
With that mindset (of I won't change cause I'm used to that) you'd be 
for ever stuck with the inferior platform even if there were a 100% 
clear path...
As an bonus, both gitlab and github break their UI in some way and you 
need to figure out where stuff is now... that's no different than moving 
somewhere else... most looks familiar but some details have moved. (last 
time github did that it took me like 2-3 minuts to find my stared repos 
now...)

On 2025-12-01 16:12, Israel Emmanuel wrote:
> Github and Gitlab may not be your personal preference, and that's
> totally up to you, but it's hard to deny that larger platforms like
> Github and GItlab make for easier collaboration because people already
> know how to use these things. The people who would be contributing to
> this project, except Xavier, have all been using Github for their
> efforts before things took a turn for the worse on my old 737. Asides
> from that, putting it on a relatively obscure platform wrecks
> discoverability. Arguments could be made that other options like
> ForgeJo _should_ be the better choice overall, but we've got to work
> with the things presented to us right now, and I just don't think they
> work in ForgeJo's favor.
> 
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 8:04 AM Nia via Flightgear-devel
> <fli...@li...> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/1/25 16:33, James Turner wrote:
>>> However, in terms of collaborating on
>>> development, ease of ‘everything’  is helpful (and typically
>> GitHub /
>>> GitLab score highly here, with other providers on a decreasing
>> scale).
>> 
>> Well... Github is taking a big step back now... too much stuff I
>> don't
>> need that gets in the way, stuff they want to force on me like the
>> AI
>> stuff... things I can't disable to get them out of the way.
>> 
>> And Gitlab is at times really bad to use on a slow train
>> connection...
>> like some times I need just 10 minutes MITM attacker captcha
>> solving,
>> just to log in!
>> 
>> Forgejo (the software that runs on codeberg) is like Github 5-10
>> years
>> ago before the enshittification started. Nice and usable... and
>> light
>> weight.
>> 
>>> So, in terms of reducing the number of forks, I’d *prefer*
>> GitHub/
>>> GitLab/etc but you can do what you want since in the end …
>> people can
>>> always fork it. We’re just very close to:
>>> https://xkcd.com/927/ <https://xkcd.com/927/>
>> 
>> But pleeeease? Just ONE MORE fork would fix this! /s
>> 
>> ... putting it anywhere but a central repo would just add another
>> standard... cause it's just a matter of time till the story will
>> repeat
>> it self...
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Flightgear-devel mailing list
>> Fli...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel