• matcha_addict@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Pulling in mainline gitea changes, I did see. But I didn’t see any notable differences from gitea. Do you know of any?

      • matcha_addict@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Gitea claims to be working on federation too, which puzzles me that forgejo presents it as a differentiator.

    • micka190@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Nothing concrete from what I can tell. Becoming a hard fork is relatively recent though (mid-November of last year, roughly).

      As a side note, I understand why Gitea and Forgejo went for a “copy GitHub Actions” approach to their CI, but man do I wish more self-hosted repo software tried to copy Drone/Woodpecker instead. Iterative containers in the pipeline is such a smoother build experience, and it kind of sucks that Gitness is the only one doing it (that I know of).

    • algernon@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s plenty, but I do not wish to hijack this thread, so… have a look at the Forgejo 7.0 release notes, the PRs it links to along notable features (and a boatload of bugfixes, many of which aren’t in Gitea). Then compare when (and if) similar features or fixes were implemented in Gitea.

      The major difference (apart from governance, and on a technical level) between Gitea and Forgejo is that Forgejo cherry picks from Gitea weekly (being a hard fork doesn’t mean all ties are severed, it means that development happens independently). Gitea does not cherry pick from Forgejo. They could, the license permits it, and it even permits sublicensing, so it’s not an obstacle for Gitea Cloud or Gitea EE, either. They just don’t.