That patch doesn't exist in forgejo though does it? (I find it to be a terrible name by the way)

There’s nothing preventing it from being dual-contributed.

I agree the name isn’t great. Very awkward to pronounce using English phonetics.

But anecdotally, I have seen a lot less red tape contributing there and a lot less bickering than on Gitea, which is perhaps too big for its britches. Just a lot of discussion and very hard to get things done on the Gitea side.

Forgejo is a word from a non-English language (Esperanto). It's pronounced "for-jay-o" which I find pretty easy to say.

A non-English, fake language invented in the late 19th century.

How is it fake? You are right that it was invented in the 19th century and is not English.

Not sure I see the conspiracy here. It's a 144-file PR that has significant management and performance issues, which seem to be the focus of the long discussion thread.

There's a specific comment in the middle that I think the title refers to where someone mentions that this has already been merged into the paid version, but now suddenly they can't get reviews for the free version:

https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24257#issuecomment-23...

End of the page he claims to have been physically impaired from working on this. No idea if that's true, just saying what's at the bottom of the page. It is a pretty huge patch though(I missed that upon first glance)

> Forgejo

Switch to the fork of the fork - brilliant. Especially when the fork fork doesn't seem to do much except bicker and merge controversial PRs on occasion.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39393794

Instead of linking to comments (wtf), I'm gonna link to their surprisingly active list of merged PRs.

https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls?q=&type=all&sort=...

Not sure what your claim about "doesn't seem to do much" is based on.

The first two pages are docs, dependency bot, and one XSS patch. Hard to know what's going on when 90% of those PRs are bot generated. Maybe they're active, maybe not, I certainly don't know, but it's definitely not clear from the link you posted.

I don't know how they're run internally, but they seem to have merged a lot of good features that the Codeberg folks developed, so they must do at least a bit more than bicker.

What controversial PRs have they merged? I haven't heard about that and it makes me a bit nervous, but I'm not finding anything obviously wrong searching for it.

I can't speak to controversial PRs, but I got very nervous about Forgejo when they memory-holed a good faith critique of the appointment of a specific new moderator.

Someone on HN linked a discussion where Forgejo was appointing a moderator [0] and had received pushback. A critic of the decision had said something along the lines of "this person has severely abused authority in this community in the past and I'm not comfortable with them getting new authority". They went back and forth for a bit with the maintainers, but by the time the link ended up on an HN thread they'd edited out the critic's comments with a warning not to post ad hominem attacks. At the time you could still read the critic's actual comments in the edit history and it was clear that they were being very reasonable.

A few weeks later I went back to that thread and the entire discussion with the critic was gone. The moderator was appointed, and all record of the dissent was eliminated. If you go to that issue thread now, there are 10-12 comments that I read before that are now missing, and it looks like this person was appointed without dissent.

That sketched me out, and I've been very cautious of Forgejo since. I trust Gitea even less, so I stick with Forgejo, but I wish I had better options.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39397269

[1] https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/issues/78

ouch; that does sound unfortunate, I'll look into it, thanks.

If this doesn't track well, I suggest you repost indicating, in subject, that they're also withholding the patch from the OSS version.

I'm not sure how to write the subject that way, within character limits, but there is zero outrage at charging $$ for OSS contributions, so the subject seems very "meh".

After all, millions of companies do that.

Good suggestion, updated the title. Thanks!

TBH the new title suggested me that they were charging $$ for merging the PR

The specific outrage in this case is that the open core doesn't get the feature, even though it was developed by an outsider. That is certainly not common, and not the expectation of contributors.