Gitea Enterprise (opens in new tab)

(about.gitea.com)

40 pointsipodopt2y ago18 comments

18 comments

Just an observation: Essentially anyone who works for a significant amount of time on an open source project, wants some way to earn money from it.

In the end all of us have to pay the bills.

gklitz2y ago

I really don’t get this. The only reason anyone ever had to run gitea instead of gitlab or GitHub was that it was a more bare bones but open source alternative. Now they are dropping the open source part and stepping into the arena of competing on enterprise features against gitlab and GitHub? Why would anyone ever chose gitea over them?

LightFog2y ago

This is exactly my feeling - it would be pretty brave for any enterprise to adopt this ahead of incumbents when it is so far behind and they are likely going to start locking away the enterprise features anyway. The whole upside is that all features were open source and could be easily patched/worked around as needed.

kj4ips2y ago

I run it in my homelab, because gitlab is really reasource intensive by comparison, and I need it to work when the network is out. The annoying part is that means outside contributions that support enterprise-y features are probably not going to be accepted. Gitea does not appear to use a CLA, so they at least shouldn't be able to re-license existing OSS, but the base license is MIT, so no virality.

alanwreath2y ago

Where are they dropping open source?

Seems like they’re just adopting a common model of free open source offerings but with the carrot of enterprise management.

jacooper2y ago

Well, this proves the forgejo fork was justified, now we have an open core version under the same brand as the main project.

LightFog2y ago

It would be interesting to hear from the Gitea contributors who were vehemently denying on here that this would happen when concerns were raised just a few months ago.

Jnr2y ago

How is that a problem? Do you donate or significantly contribute in any other way to Gitea? I don't think so.

Those guys for years and years have been developing a free tool getting almost nothing back in return. Morally there is nothing wrong about this.

And if you think you can do better for free and keep everything open source, you can always contribute to the fork and keep enjoying it.

LightFog2y ago

Clarity and honesty around future plans and incentives are important to those who put the little political capital they have behind adopting projects like this.

Who knows if Forgejo can pull off the technical side, which I do plan to contribute to, but at least they have clear principles.

1 more reply

timetraveller262y ago

I'll consider it when they start eating their own dog food

LightFog2y ago

Wow - I hadn’t noticed that they still use GitHub for their own development. From their long-running migration ticket it seems the project has since grown so large they are basically stuck there too.

Jnr2y ago

Open source community in large uses Github because of the user base, not because their own hosted platform doesn't have some of the features.

1 more reply

yogorenapan2y ago

As much as I don’t like the direction they’re going, it’s understandable that they can’t maintain it for free forever.

I think the gatekeept features are indeed for enterprises and individual users aren’t affected too much. If you’re a company and use Gitea, it would be nice to pay. One thing I don’t know is whether enterprise customers get to review the source code.

blamecanada2y ago

A company might switch from Github Enterprise to Gitea Enterprise if they were fed up with GitHub Support (or lack of it) and wanted to be able to run on-prem with k8s.

redundantly2y ago

Or just run gogs.

ehPReth2y ago

or https://forgejo.org/, a fork of Gitea by the folks behind Codeberg

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

18 comments

pritambarhate2y ago

Just an observation: Essentially anyone who works for a significant amount of time on an open source project, wants some way to earn money from it.

In the end all of us have to pay the bills.

gklitz2y ago

LightFog2y ago

kj4ips2y ago

alanwreath2y ago

Where are they dropping open source?

Seems like they’re just adopting a common model of free open source offerings but with the carrot of enterprise management.

jacooper2y ago

Well, this proves the forgejo fork was justified, now we have an open core version under the same brand as the main project.

LightFog2y ago

It would be interesting to hear from the Gitea contributors who were vehemently denying on here that this would happen when concerns were raised just a few months ago.

Jnr2y ago

How is that a problem? Do you donate or significantly contribute in any other way to Gitea? I don't think so.

Those guys for years and years have been developing a free tool getting almost nothing back in return. Morally there is nothing wrong about this.

And if you think you can do better for free and keep everything open source, you can always contribute to the fork and keep enjoying it.

LightFog2y ago

Clarity and honesty around future plans and incentives are important to those who put the little political capital they have behind adopting projects like this.

Who knows if Forgejo can pull off the technical side, which I do plan to contribute to, but at least they have clear principles.

1 more reply

timetraveller262y ago

I'll consider it when they start eating their own dog food

LightFog2y ago

Jnr2y ago

Open source community in large uses Github because of the user base, not because their own hosted platform doesn't have some of the features.

1 more reply

yogorenapan2y ago

As much as I don’t like the direction they’re going, it’s understandable that they can’t maintain it for free forever.

blamecanada2y ago

A company might switch from Github Enterprise to Gitea Enterprise if they were fed up with GitHub Support (or lack of it) and wanted to be able to run on-prem with k8s.

redundantly2y ago

Or just run gogs.

ehPReth2y ago

or https://forgejo.org/, a fork of Gitea by the folks behind Codeberg

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse