Git hosting that never leaves Europe
pushin.eu
pushin.eu
*The product is stable, but still in development. That's why some of the core things like pricing, etc. are missing. BUT:*
1. Business Model: Pushin will have subscriptions for individuals and teams. Pricing is not yet decided but it'll be close to GitHub/GitLab pricing.
2. Privacy: In true German fashion, we *don't* want your private data. Pushin doesn't track anything beyond the obvious: email, password hash, username, whatever information you put on your profile.
3. Roadmap: We're currently in Beta, but everything looks good so far. We'll probably go GA beginning of 2027. I'll focus on delivering the core features first and make sure that they are polished and of good quality before moving on to the nice-to-haves.
4. I say "we" but it's really only me (Peter Ullrich, peterullrich.com) and my dog (Bella, Labrador, beige). "We" are not VC funded, but bootstrapping on bare metal Scaleway servers. My wish is for this to become a proper company soon though.
5. Tech-stack: Elixir (Phoenix + LiveView) for most parts, Rust for the Git parts, S3-compatible buckets and Postgres on Scaleway, servers are bare metal Scaleway servers running in Paris.
6. Git implementation: Just like Tangled, I've used Rust and the gitoxide libraries to build a Git implementation that's fully compatible with the canonical Git CLI, but uses S3-compatible buckets as storage instead of keeping the entire repo on disk. I'll write in-depth about this soon, but it's very much what Tangled did, just with a different storage concept.
I gotta be honest that I'm both scared but also excited that Pushin hit HN. I wish we'd be better prepared, but here we are. Many thanks to anyone who is willing to try it out!
This seems poorly worded or genuinely concerning. Why do you want to track my email, username or anything in my profile. What do you do with it? How do you track it?
The word you are looking for is “collect”.
Saying you “track” implies you’re putting together a profile to be consumed in other services
We plan to reduce low-quality contributions through several features, some already in place and others still to come. Invite-only registration helps us discourage low-quality accounts and confirm that new members are real people. Next, we plan to introduce a vouching system, similar to Tangled's, that lets contributors build a reputation. We'll combine that reputation with other signals to assess new pull requests and issues. Contributions that appear low quality will be clearly marked and de-emphasized, while maintainers will make the final decision. We also plan to limit how many pull requests and issues a new contributor can open in repositories they don't own. This will be an ongoing effort, but the goal is simple: maintainers stay in control of their queues.
Ironic really because that was the original idea behind Git - to build a tree of trusted developers for the Linux kernel. Linus has those immediately below him that he trusts will push good quality code, and those folks do the same with their group of contributors.
> Invite-only registration helps us
If this is invite-only, then what you're doing is emulating the original strategy of Linus: only certain folks have commit rights. Extend that out to only certain folks have PR-creation rights and you're done. Maintainers select those that can contribute, these folks in-turn, select those that can contribute to the project, rinse and repeat.
Let everyone create issues and implicitly ignore these because any issue that doesn't make it passed the "acceptance level of a maintainer" will naturally be ignored and disappear. As is the case over at GH - issues naturally suffocate because no maintainer gives them air.
Perhaps have a special category "untrusted/toxic PRs" for contributors who don't belong in the tree of trust. These PRs are handled in a toxic-proof containment environment, i.e., they get particular vetting attentions by maintainers. Obviously this would be a path into the "tree of trust" for a project.
Then each project can also implicitly define what is "low quality" for their project - it's how they handle the "toxic PRs".
EDIT:
That's also why branching and forking is so cheap in Git: each sub-maintainer can maintain their own fork with it's branches before pushing up changes to the main fork. (Compare branching using RCS/CVS or Subversion to Git to get a feeling of "cheap" ;))
This can be done over at GH if a fork would be actively maintained by a sub-maintainer and every X days/weeks/months they would push the entire changes of the fork to the main repository. That would be closer to the Linux development strategy - as I understand it.
Especially for a git service, something what would will be eminently used by software developers, who mostly can speak English anyway.
…weirdest map of either Europe or the EU I've seen in a long time.
Is there an EU law about a "dog tax" when you've mentioned the dog? Perhaps there should be.
Ps - I'm kidding. Mostly. I like dogs and cats. Frequently, more than people.
- and I agree!
Disclaimer: I am building https://juju.bi, therefore you don't need to answer if uncomfortable.
Can you clarify, here and on the website, whether the data remains:
* in _EU member state_ sovereign territory
* in _European states'_ sovereign territory
* on the contentinent of Europe
or some combination of the above?
I am specifically wondering about:
* Out-of-Europe territories of European states.
* UK, Norway, Russia, Switzerland, Serbia etc.
> Where is my code actually hosted?
> On bare-metal servers that we operate in Scaleway's Paris datacenters
But whether they're making a promise to stay in the EU specifically? Or whether they might expand to territories that aren't physically in Europe? That could matter, and the FAQ doesn't tell us.
(And yeah the line at the top says 100% EU but that's not the full picture.)
I’m not sure many people would include Russia in Europe in normal speech, unless they were a geographer in which case Russia is partly “Europe” in some cases I think.
Even when the UK was part of the EU if someone in the UK said “Europe” they meant continental Europe and someone in continental Europe would be unlikely to mean the UK if they said Europe unless they were using “Europe” as a shorthand for the EU. When the UK was in the EU a United States American saying Europe would probably not not be including the UK in their mental model of Europe and, indeed [0], might not be very clear on what the UK actually is, because that’s confusing for the countries they agglomerate into “England” which might also include Ireland. A United States American saying “Europe” most likely means “Paris” and then maybe France, Italy, Spain or Greece but probably not Germany which is definitely the EU and everything that is wrong with the EU. But maybe Switzerland, because that very European.
As a European I’m not even sure where Serbia is, or if it’s even a real country [1]. I thought it was capital of Albania [2] . Or possibly a region of North Macedonia [3]
[0] only some of what I have said should be taken even part way seriously. Very little in fact
[1] Obviously being satirical here
[2,3] Also real countries, also European, but not necessarily “Europe” and definitely not EU. Yet.
In Europe some people generally and incorrectly use "Europe" and the EU interchangeably. Europe existed far before the EU and will continue to exist after the EU finally comes to an end.
First clause: indisputable.
Second clause: maybe, maybe not. Europe hasn't always existed as a concept, and its longevity is unknown.
Europe is the name of a continent. What reason(s) would there be to change the name of a continent?
In contrast, the EU is a trading block, set up to foster greater pan-European trading relations. It's not the only pan-European institution. For example, the Council of Europe ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe ) is a separate pan-European institution, set up in 1946 which was before the EU or any of the predecessors of the EU, and amongst other projects was behind the formation of the European Court of Human Rights. I bring this up to highlight that we do not need the EU in order to have collaboration between European countries.
When do you think people began calling "America" "America", and why? Or referring to the largest continent as "Africa" ?
I understand what your point was. I was thinking long term and noting that the future is uncertain, at best.
You haven't given any dates, but if you're talking about ancient Egypt, i.e. the Egypt before 0AD, then yes. The term "Europa" was used to refer to the continent around this time by the Greeks, and I don't see why Egyptian people wouldn't have picked up on a useful term they didn't have before.
Oh, wait.
Even if you did/did not, vernacular evolves. So at the time that you fervently hope the EU comes to its (clearly deserved, Mr Putin) end, I imagine people will be able to adapt their wrong speak and clearly incorrect thinking to ensure they adhere to the newspeak.
I find it funny you think the only reason people would want the end of the EU is if they're a Russian agent. The EU has very little to do with defence. Perhaps your argument would hold more weight if talking about NATO, but even then it's not necessary for countries to be members of NATO in order to collaborate on protection when their collective security interests align.
I guess you don't wander out of your office in Brussels much.
"Your repos never leave the EU"
That's clear enough I think.
A few questions if you don't mind:
1) Do you plan to open source the platform? If not, what's your reasoning?
2) You say that platform stability is one of your core goals. How does that look in practice? From what I gather you rely on Scaleway a lot.
3) What makes your platform stand out from e.g. codeberg.org?
Thank you in advance :)
I wish you the best, and I understand this might be necessary initially, but honestly I myself would never use a one man operation for anything I run in production.
- Registrar: HOSTINGER operations, UAB, Lithuania. Hostinger-branded authoritative DNS servers run on Cloudflare’s network. This creates a dependency on a US company.
- IPv6 is not supported by the public website/Git endpoint.
- DNSSEC would be a great addition for security, especially due to the use of US-based Cloudflare and Let's Encrypt.
I hope all the best to succeed with this project, I'm sold!
also fits the description of "Git hosting that never leaves Europe".
Codeberg Terms of Use[^0] makes it clear that it's only for "projects covered by a licence for free and open source software, free and open source hardware, or free cultural works", and "You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools". They also only provide private repos where the FOSS system need it for their infra or what not, and not just for any purpose.
These are totally fine for Codeberg to do, and it's wonderful for FOSS!!
However it is not a viable place for many projects that are on GitHub/GitLab now and would want to migrate, say: any commercial project, that would need "permission-free" private repos, or when the teams want to decided themselves how much generative AI their developers should use, not their Git-hosting provider...
So yeah, different ballpark.
[0]: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/TermsOfUse...
They are strongly ideology-focused and it’s a matter of time they ban something you want to upload.
It’s not government censorship, but it’s censorship nonetheless.
The UI is a lot snappier than Github.
The promise not to train models on the code is not very useful for public repos, and I cannot see anything about private repos.
FYI, there is the nuke option, which is generating endless nonsense pages as a form of “bot sink” [1] that ends the scraping relatively quickly, but IIRC that also tanks your search rankings, since it likely affects benign crawlers too – not something you’d necessarily want to happen to a new domain, unless you really need to protect server resources against aggressive hostile crawlers like SourceHut and so many others had to combat.
[1] https://www.toxsec.com/p/ai-tar-pits-are-drowning-llm-scrape...
A developer would be the one using the LLM to evaluate page response text and scraping what they need.
LLMs cannot “crawl pages” or “scrape” or do anything - it’s an offline archive with a few convenience methods.
Being a bit needlessly pedantic here. I think it's well understood in these circles that such models are being driven by agents, which absolutely can crawl and scrape. The only thing a human needs to do is write rules for the agent to follow.
It’s also not true.
An LLM cannot visit the internet at all.
There is no “agent” - that is a marketing term. It’s software and LLM that’s it.
Wouldn’t matter in court anyway or anywhere you put it to the test even if you called it bits.
Point is dodging accountability by saying some “AI did it” when it’s not reflective of reality.
LLMs are read only and have no access to the internet :)
If the founder had done a big b2b ad blitz without that stuff, sure, some griping might be warranted. But this isn’t that: some fledgling product website went viral-ish in HN and you’re complaining about the digital equivalent of the paint not being dry.
The humour is there: https://pushin.eu/orgs/mctestface/members (Boaty Mac Boat Face ref mentioned)
Honestly, I frankly do not understand why this project is so heavily Anti AI by a creator so heavily reliant on AI. An oxymoron, really. Also hiding the fact that this entire project is likely completely vibeslopped, given it re-implements most of Forgejo in a matter of months as a single contributor, is just evil, given its stated mission.
That name though, does make me feel that somewhere in the stack is a tool called Gitler. Sorry!!
Once upon a time, I, too, had a domain where the TLD was part of the actual name and required to read it correctly (think something like foobar-pl.us). In my experience this left most people confused and I abandoned that quite quickly.
He was also a European…
I think the hardest part about working on the same thing is to not immediately post it when you see other products in the same space pop up.
It should cost money - I just want to know how much.
I'll introduce subscriptions soon, we're currently still in invite-only beta, but the subscriptions will be very much like GitHub/GitLabs with individual and team pricing.
Idea is promising though, hope it matures into something solid.
And yet the marketing copy is egregious AI slop.
There's a possibility this was made by a person. Apart from that good luck getting any information behind this.
Hm.
Not very reassuring as of late
As long as it’s within bandwidth and storage quota, why the hell should they care? “Slop” is ambiguous and ill-defined.
This is ideological anti-customer nonsense.
- "Bots are welcome. Slop gets blocked."
- "No AI buttons bolted onto every surface."
yet the entire website appears to be itself AI slop. is the codebase vibecoded too? I seem to get a "connection lost" toast notification every time the page loads despite it being a wholly static page.
your service is founding itself on a promise (forges in general are of course not a novel concept) that i feel you're failing to uphold.
I'd love a CI platform that just used a super thin docker + script driver. Rather than platform specific YAML files that define steps.
(Of my 200+ published repos, I'd say about 175 contain code I wrote purely to scratch my own itches - if other people find it useful, great! If they don't find it useful, that's also fine with me - I'm not sure why I should be obliged to go out of my way to help though?)