[aliasxneo]

> That seems like a completely different concern than what you originally stated?

I started with a hypothetical. Then I used an actual real-world example. I have 100+ repos on GitHub spanning a wide array of technologies. If I moved all 100+ over, how do I know I won't fall afoul of whatever the community votes to ban next?

The point is Codeberg isn't a good fit for my situation which needs more continuity and less surprises, and that's been made readily apparent now. So I'm leaving, just like many other people who have been posting about it.

[free_bip]

Luckily for you, as far as I can tell you don't have any concrete reason to fear having your repos taken down. Or at least I haven't been given any.

If the reason is more emotional than rational ("this feels like it's going to change more"), that's okay. Not everything needs to be governed by rigid rules. The Codeberg community knows that well. If in a few years your 100+ repos are still all fine and dandy to their rule set I'm sure they'd be happy to have you.

[aliasxneo]

> Luckily for you, as far as I can tell you don't have any concrete reason to fear having your repos taken down. Or at least I haven't been given any.

Unfortunately you can't make that decision. I have to wait and find out how far the ToS violation will be implemented. Or I just avoid that stress and go somewhere else. Most people being affected seem to be choosing the latter.

> If the reason is more emotional than rational

That's a bit reductive. Risk management always has a level of uncertainty involved. No one makes decisions with 100% certainty in the outcome. Before these votes, I had a certain level of risk assessment in moving off Github To Codeberg that favored Codeberg. Now that situation has changed. It's not "emotional" to recognize that.

[mariusor]

Have you considered actually asking someone at Codeberg about your cryptography project?

[theshrike79]

Who would one ask to get an official and enforceable answer?

I don’t want an opinion, I need a definitive ruling I can trust.

[mariusor]

It's not like they don't have a contact page: https://docs.codeberg.org/contact/

> I need a definitive ruling I can trust

Why? What's so special about the place where you host your source? It's the second time I see this sentiment in the thread, and I don't get it. If an official channel tells you a project is OK, and then someone else decides it's not, what does it really happen outside of you taking your project elsewhere?

[theshrike79]

Hosting a project with its issues, packages, releases, discussions and everything is an investment. The URLs will be in multiple places, some of which I don't control.

Then suddenly the hoster decides that my project isn't wanted because the zeitgeist is against some technology used in it and poof it goes away.

What now?

"Just move away", sure. I can do that if they still let me export my data. But to be honest I'd rather just use a platform with a smaller risk of getting booted because someone decided my project is "too AI" or something similar.

I have no idea if there's a way to argue against the decisions, what proof do I need to provide, do I need to prepare somehow? Like have video of myself with a dated newspaper typing the code by hand to prove AI wasn't used? :D

[inigyou]

Ok then do that. They're not asking for your business. They lose money on it.

[warkdarrior]

Is this the "contact our sales team for pricing" of open source?

[inigyou]

no this is the "we are real people, not a faceless algorithm" of open source.