[treyd]

Codeberg is a service, not software. If we applied this standard then Codeberg would already have been in violation of the 4 Freedoms because they forbid distribution of CSAM (I would hope).

Forgejo is unaffected by this because it's the software not the service and is not subject to the service's terms of service. You're misunderstanding the scope of this policy change.

[hedora]

I tried to address this when I pointed out no SaaS meets the bar in absolute terms, and the FSF also addressed it with the word "adequately".

The policy change means that some free software projects are no longer welcome on codeberg, specifically because those projects take a stronger stance towards protecting free software than codeberg.

What am I misunderstanding? Why should I trust them as stewards of forgejo?

[inigyou]

Why shouldn't you? Linus won't let me post erotic Sonic fanfiction to the mailing list, but I still trust Linux to be a safe platform to write erotic Sonic fanfiction.

[48terry]

I thought "don't like it, fork it" was the open source credo? You don't have to trust them as stewards. Fork and maintain it yourself then.

[pibaker]

Forgejo was forked from gitea when the later introduced some controversial business strategies. Gitea was forked from Gogs because gogs did not accept outside contributions.

See a trend? Maybe you can be the next.