[kajman]

> So while the following use cases are discouraged (similar to private repositories), they are likely to be tolerated in practice:

> Side projects and experiments with little resource usage > Specific tools and custom scripts that would be unlikely to find a community anyway, even if they were not LLM-generated

I really don't want to join a commons where something I make might be "tolerated in practice" based on a given moderator's vibe. Which I suppose is the message I was meant to receive from the issue that passed the vote.

[imtringued]

"Side projects with little resource usage"

Wow so they banned literally everything?

[inigyou]

It's an opinionated charity host for free software. Are you actually making free software or just dumping your junk that is technically free but no one uses? If the latter, they're telling you to go away.

[imtringued]

They reserved the right to ban anything based on exceedingly vague policies.

Whether something is someone's side project or not is independent of the amount of users or the presence of a community. They can now ban any project with a single maintainer that exceeds an arbitrary resource limit.

Basically they're putting a gun to your head demanding you to always be popular enough to curry their favour.

When you think about how most projects start unpopular by definition, the only way to host on Codeberg is first by becoming popular on another platform and then moving to Codeberg, but if that is true why bother migrating? The moment your project's popularity fades or you lose maintainers, the project will get axed by Codeberg.

So basically the lesson you're getting here is to not trust the altruistic stranger. His motivations are less sincere than the ones of the self interested stranger.

[inigyou]

Is dang on HN doing the same? Is he putting a gun to your head?