Migrating the main Zig repository from GitHub to Codeberg

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Motivations for Leaving GitHub

  • Many commenters support moving off GitHub in general, citing centralization, Microsoft control, AI push (Copilot, “AI company now”), and long‑standing product decay.
  • Zig’s specific complaints about GitHub Actions resonate: brittle YAML model, opaque scheduling, random failures, inaccessible logs, and particularly the “safe sleep” bug that can spin forever and silently disable runners.
  • Some see the move as consistent with Zig’s “zero dependency / toolchain sovereignty” philosophy: GitHub is just another risky dependency.

Codeberg / Forgejo as Destination

  • Supporters like that Codeberg/Forgejo are libre, non‑profit, self‑hostable and not pushing dark patterns or monetization nudges.
  • Criticisms: weaker infra and uptime, old/second‑hand hardware, no SLAs, perceived slowness during the HN “hug of death,” and unclear long‑term stability as a “post‑GitHub world” platform.
  • Accessibility is a serious concern: current image‑only CAPTCHA makes registration effectively impossible for screen‑reader users.

CI and Multi‑Platform Support

  • Zig devs stress GitHub runner limitations: few OSes and architectures, .NET dependency, and difficulty getting patches for additional platforms accepted (even large vendors keep their own forks).
  • Forgejo Actions is praised as easier to deploy, more responsive to contributions, and close enough to GitHub Actions to ease migration.
  • Some argue GitHub Actions remains the “best free CI” mainly because of free macOS runners; others say GitLab CI and self‑hosted systems are superior but cost more.

LLM “Slop” and Policy

  • There’s broad frustration with AI‑generated PR/issue spam and “vibe‑coded” repos that don’t work.
  • Many maintainers defend a blanket “no LLM” policy as the only practical way to avoid being overwhelmed; reviewing on “merit alone” is seen as infeasible at current volumes.
  • A particular user’s massive AI‑generated PRs across multiple languages are repeatedly cited as a cautionary tale.

Tone, Professionalism, and Community Image

  • A large subthread condemns the blog’s language (“losers”, “monkeys”) toward GitHub engineers as bullying, childish, and in conflict with Zig’s own CoC.
  • Others find the bluntness refreshing, “punching up” at a megacorp, and see civility concerns as misplaced compared to the substance of the critique.
  • Some say the tone makes them less likely to adopt or contribute to Zig; others dismiss this as overreaction.

Centralization, Discoverability, and Activism

  • Several worry that leaving GitHub sacrifices discoverability, integrations, and GitHub Sponsors, which matter for a still‑growing language.
  • Others argue established projects don’t need GitHub to attract serious contributors and that mirroring or federation can restore some benefits.
  • The ICE relationship and similar ethical concerns are seen by some as valid grounds for exit, by others as “purity spirals” or distracting virtue signaling.