mfenniak
Joined 19 years ago
Karma
566
Submissions
159
Member since
Jan 25
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/mfenniak; my proof: https://keybase.io/mfenniak/sigs/eo6JiTXuJQV68__kYj4qCWj-PkplQU5F3clSvlBADHU ]
View on Hacker NewsRecent submissions
Comment · 1 month ago
Forgejo's security team received disclosure of this issue on September 4th. (source: I am a member of that team)
Comment · 2 months ago
A basic API to access Actions logs was added in Forgejo v16. `/api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/jobs/{job_id}/logs`
Comment · 4 months ago
You may be violating Codeberg's rules. They are not a service for developmental of closed-source software.
https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#how-about-pri...
Comment · 4 months ago
Forgejo is lightweight relative to some other options, but it is not resilient to scraping. Scrapers can access, commit-by-commit, each individual file, each file's "git blame", and each commit's repository archive... and they do. Most public Forgejo instances need to rely on a reverse proxy like Anubis or Iocaine in order to prevent server resources from being exhausted by bad actors. Or require sign-in for all access.
Comment · 4 months ago
That's not an API tool. It performs direct database access for administrative functions on the Forgejo server.
But there is a different tool that is an API accessing CLI: https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/forgejo-cli
Comment · 5 months ago
The other way around; Forgejo is a fork of Gitea.
Comment · 6 months ago
Forgejo 15 was just released last week with repo-specific access tokens. More to come in the future.
Comment · 7 months ago
It is kinda incorrect and kinda correct. Codeberg allows you to create private repositories. However, their rules are clear that the intent of private repositories must be in support of Free software projects: https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#how-about-pri..., which for many people is effectively not allowing private repositories.
Comment · 7 months ago
Forgejo is committed to using exclusively Free Software for it's own project development. Windows and Mac versions of the Forgejo Runner are built in the project's CI system as a minimal check to ensure platform compatibility, but due to the project's commitment, the project doesn't do integration testing on these platform. And therefore doesn't distribute untested software.
A contributor maintains a tested re-release of Forgejo Runner for Windows: https://github.com/Crown0815/Forgejo-runner-windows-builder
But, pull it down and build it, and it will work.
Comment · 7 months ago
As a developer working on Forgejo -- glad you like it!
Comment · 8 months ago
It probably depends on your scale, but I'd suggest self-hosting a Forgejo instance, if it's within your domain expertise to run a service like that. It's not hard to operate, it will be blazing fast, it provides most of the same capabilities, and you'll be in complete control over the costs and reliability.
A people have replied to you mentioning Codeberg, but that service is intended for Open Source projects, not private commercial work.
Comment · 10 months ago
On the plus side, Forgejo Action's implementation is still actively improving, where it seems that for GitHub if it's not AI, it's not being touched.
However, as noted in the article, Forgejo's implementation currently has all the same "package manager" problems.
Comment · 11 months ago
> * Strange error: "Error: Open(/home/runner/.cache/actcache/bolt.db): timeout"
This will occur if you have a `forgejo-runner daemon` running while you try to use `exec` -- both are trying to open the cache database, and only the first to open it can operate. You could avoid this by changing the cache directory of the daemon by changing `cache.dir` in the config file, or run the two processes as different users.
> It's a bit strange there are two files IMHO.
The `.runner` file isn't a config file, it's a state file -- not intended for user editing. But yes, it's a bit odd.
Comment · 11 months ago
Although it's not a writeup, most of the problems can be traced through this "moving-to-forgejo" meta-issue: https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/moving-to-forgejo/issue...
Comment · 1 year ago
The Forgejo project has been gently trying to redirect new contributors into fixing bugs before trying to jump into the project to implement big features (https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/337). This allows a new contributor to get into the community, get used to working with the codebase, do something of clear value... but for the project a lot of it is about establishing reputation.
Will the contributor respond to code-review feedback? Will they follow-up on work? Will they work within the code-of-conduct and learn the contributor guidelines? All great things to figure out on small bugs, rather than after the contributor has done significant feature work.