Document public Forgejo instances in FAQ #656
Labels
No labels
Codeberg Pages
Documentation Usability
Forgejo
Good First Issue! 👋
Kind: Bug
Kind: Documentation
Kind: Enhancement
Kind: Feature
Kind: Question
Kind: Security
Licensing
Part: Generator
Priority: High
Priority: Low
Priority: Medium
Reviewed: Confirmed
Reviewed: Duplicate
Reviewed: Invalid
Reviewed: Wontfix
Status: Blocked
Status: Help wanted
Status: In progress
Status: Needs feedback
Status: Ready for Review
Status: Review
Status: Stale
No milestone
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
Codeberg/Documentation#656
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Codeberg's infrastructure might not be for everyone, but promoting the use of free and open-source software as well as decentralization (even from ourselves) can help advance the association's goals.
We should document alternatives to Codeberg in our FAQ and particularly raise attention to Forgejo's list of public instances: https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/delightful-forgejo#public-instances
We already have https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/#alternatives-to-codeberg
Which links to that particular list.
GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH I missed that
Do you think that this should be done in the FAQ? That's where I'd look after reading about the licensing requirements / private repositories.
We can back reference the 'alternatives to codeberg' section in the FAQ.