A DAO is much more like a cooperative. The complexity comes from the value distribution and vote models.

That said, you don't need crypto for that, just well made processes.

It's really a shame that an entire category of software and organizational practices have been smeared because of "the crypto phenomenon".

Welcome to the trough of disillusionment. It will pass.

"Smart contracts" are a defining feature of DAOs. "Smart contracts" are not something that are offered outside of cryptocurrency / blockchain platforms. No one has found a viable use for blockchains that cannot be better solved in other means except as massive vehicles for scams.

Any organization that tries to implement a DAO / smart contract system for governance is asking for trouble, because they’re legally unsound and untested.

As far as organizational structures are concerned, there are plenty of viable structures and legal sorts of entities that can be used. (Gitea Ltd might be able to fix a lot of the goodwill issues by switching to a B corp structure or even to a legal cooperative structure.)

Then just make a cooperative organization. There are legal means for doing so in most jurisdictions. There’s absolutely no need to use a term that makes no sense without cryptoscams and hackable "smart" contracts.

This premise of a DAO is that votes are the only thing that ultimately matter, which can make things simpler. Something gets presented as a course of action, a vote happens, and the if enough votes qualify you make the action. In a crypto DAO, this voting is implemented in the blockchain's software rules as a contract; thus, it is completely automated. Sometimes, to the dismay of the users. But, there is nothing requiring you to do this in software. It just means they want, in theory, that you'll somehow be able to have a vote without being required to be known or involved directly.

If the DAO isn't implemented in software using smart contracts, then what is the difference with a "traditional" foundation like e.g. Debian or Python have?