https://giveupgithub.org/

I've stumbled upon plenty of projects that migrated to alternative platforms. If anything, this may just further accelerate the process.

genuinely. it's been 8 years, ya'll have only yourselves to blame.

Let me preface with the fact that I know nothing about Git or GitHub. Could you just have one "project" and have the readme be links to your Codeberg/Forgejo/GitTea projects?

And now you know why Microsoft bought it. Nothing better than a captive user base.

Is this for real? That’s incredibly stupid.

You can still have mirrors of your stuff on GitHub and push there, just have your primary forge be a different place.

My answer to those is always "i code for money, I don't code in my free time"

Just make mirror repos.

They say jump, and we ask how high.

Like good little bitches.

I've seen many FOSS projects use gitlab. You can even self-host it. Also, from https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/ linked in another comment:

- Alternative Hosting Services:
Codeberg
SourceHut
- Self-Host (or join a group that self-hosts). A few options:
Forgejo
GitLab Community Edition (note, the GitLab Enterprise Edition, which is provided to the public on gitlab.com, is (like GitHub) trade-secret, proprietary, vendor-lock-in software)
SourceHut

Rare Fossil win

True, but the article is about projects getting de-platformed, so all that goes away under those circumstances. There's value tied up in all that data, but the codebase itself might be far harder to replace securely if the public repo just vanishes. Better to have at least an alternate offsite backup - on another service even - if all you do is maintain a project-owner-controlled clone.

Plus, I know it's a small gesture, but some folks might need that tiny push to migrate if they're already fence-sitting about leaving.

I don't see it. Indie developers would comprise the vast majority of open source projects. Many of them add value to their own products, and they know it, which is why they're largely a services company now. And the timing is so close to everything going on with adult content in other places.

https://www.polygon.com/steam-visa-mastercard-paypal-censorship-project-2025-early-access/

Exactly. Steam is so laissez-faire about adult content that removing one game, without elaborating, and allowing so many others sounds exactly to me like it violates or risks violating a law somewhere, and so they're covering their asses, maybe even preemptively. I'm not a lawyer, but their advice is often to just shut the fuck up. Epic sure was excited to host it when Steam declined and then did the same thing. For all I know, the reason GOG can host it but the other two won't is that maybe GOG doesn't operate in a country where some law makes that game a problem for them.

There's a bit of merit to that. After a purchase, a lot of people are wary, and likely to magnify any changes that happen immediately. They need a period of stabilization to dissuade fears, and assure that "nothing will change in the long run". Even this article is highlighting what happened around a month ago over a period of time, because it wasn't apparent in the moment.

You know people were saying this was going to happen eventually back in 2018 when that happened, right?

We have seen how much MicroSlop has stopped caring about their products over the last few years, so this shouldn't be that surprising.

I'm quite sure said users clicked right past a notification of the updated TOS, just like we all do, without even skimming it.