It's only a great alternative if you believe GitHub deserves to die because it hosts everyone and making proprietary software should be made as difficult as possible. Which is the same as being against people making a living from building and selling software. ie you are against the existence of programming as a profession. In specifically that case this is superior to GitHub.
> It's only a great alternative if you believe GitHub deserves to die
Geez, why so extreme? They choose whom they support for free, and they choose FLOSS projects with similar goals/philosophies. If your project has a different philosophy, fine, up to you, but it's not something they want to spend their time to support for free. You are welcome to go somewhere else, including going to or staying at GitHub.
Nobody wants anything "to die". It's about providing alternatives for people who are not entirely happy. If you are, fine, nobody forces you to anything. Just like you can't force the Codeberg people to provide something to you for free which they are not comfortable with.
You ask 'why so extreme'. What mostly riles me up about some 'foss movement' people is the fact that some of them think they're morally superior. In cases like the poster I replied to it seemed obvious and I point out what his ethics actually mean in the end. Perhaps it will make him think.
Honestly, it never works to get people to listen to what you have to say if you do it in a self-righteous, condescending, and abrasive manner. They just write you off as a jerk and it reinforces their belief that people who don't agree with them are unpleasant.
You could almost certainly pay to host non-open source projects on Codeberg. It happens to be that the price is unlisted, though (and it's probably higher than what you or anyone else would want to spend, anyway).
I don't understand the purpose of this comment. It strikes me as a nonsequitur. How does it conform to the logical throughline of the previous two comments?
Github is a great alternative to Codeberg. It is for people who have no problem having a corporation use your code to train a neural network to spit verbatim copies of its inputs stripped of a license. Which is the same as being against people making a living from building and selling software, i.e. you are against the existence of programming as a profession.
