this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
157 points (86.2% liked)

Open Source

30956 readers
490 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
157
Why FOSS projects are using proprietary, privacy invasive infrastructure? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
125 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As you can easily notice, today many open source projects are using some services, that are… sus.

For example, Github is the most popular place to store your project code and we all know, who owns it. And not to forget that sketchy AI training on every line of your code. Don't we have alternatives? Oh, yes we have. Gitlab, Codeberg, Notabug, etc. You can even host your own Gitea or Forgejo instance if you want.

Also, Crowdin is very popular in terms of software (and docs) translation. Even Privacy Guides and The New Oil use Crowdin, even though we have FLOSS Weblate, that you can easily self-host or use public instances.

So, my question is: if you are building a FLOSS / privacy related project, why using proprietary and privacy invasive tools?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Usually because resources are limited, both financial and time, so people make do with what they can.

As projects grow, and as the FOSS alternatives improve, projects can switch over.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Usually, that isn't happening and big projects just stay at Github, which is kinda sad.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

They will say “it’s just Git so we can easily switch whenever” but 90% of the time the start buying into the platform-exclusive features & say it will be too difficult to move later. I can have sympathy for legacy projects before the buyout, but now you 're purposefully buying in despite knowing better.