Hacker News Reader

Comment by notpushkin | Hacker News Reader

> depending on what you’re developing it may or may not be a good fit for you

I think if your project is free / open source (edit: and you don’t use LLMs/AI), Codeberg is the a good starting point at least. You can move on to a self-hosted instance if you feel you’ve outgrown it, but even for larger projects I think you can get away with self-hosting just the CI runners.

And don’t forget to donate! https://donate.codeberg.org/ / https://join.codeberg.org/

View on HN

if you use ai to program at all you can't use codeberg.

Good point, I forgot they’ve recently banned it. Updated my comment.

You've made the same exaggerated claim in two comments. Not only are you not banned from Codeberg if you have used LLMs to help you write code "in any of your projects", but you're not even prohibited from using LLMs to help you develop projects that you host on Codeberg.

What you can't do is "share projects that mostly consist of code written by 'generative AI'-tools". <https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/commit/71149c7fc95ccfeae36...>

I feel like you just directly contradicted yourself so there must be some nuance I am missing. Or is the key word "mostly"? Like I can use LLMs to help the work but still have to type most of the code myself?

I have not written more than maybe 10 lines of code in the last year so it seems I am prohibited from hosting on codeberg?

Or is the key word "share" and that's somehow different from "host"?

I suspect the fidelity of your comment to your actual level of confusion is low. In any case, if you're really this confused by the information provided earlier, then the chances aren't good that there's anything that anyone could say to get you unconfused.

Right... That's exactly the kind of nonsense that turns people away from ecosystems.

Good luck with that.

The scope of confusion expands unabated.

1. I am not Codeberg.

2. Turning away people doing unwanted things is the whole purpose of Codeberg's new policy. Why you present this as a undesirable side effect rather than exactly what the policy was designed to do is the only difficult thing to comprehend in this thread.

See also the codeberg blog post (https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...) which has more informal guidelines. That includes projects that are:

1. created by LLM agents -- any vibe-coded projects;

2. mainly written and maintained by LLMs -- this would cover the recent changes to the rsync project;

3. tied to the LLM ecosystem -- this covers pytorch, llama.cpp, cursor, SillyTavern, AI skills repositories, and a whole host of other projects.

It's not exaggerated. If you use AI at all for any code in the project it cannot be hosted on codeberg. They made that pretty clear in their blog post.

You can read it yourself - https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-...

> If you use AI at all for any code in the project it cannot be hosted on codeberg. They made that pretty clear in their blog post.

No, they didn't. That's not what the blog post says.

> You can read it yourself

I didn't fail to do the reading beforehand. I posted a direct link to the change in the TOS and which is currently linked at the top of all Codeberg pages. Can you read it yourself?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com