People freaking out that is considering to delete inactive free-tier repositories [1]... I mean what did you expect? Someone to host all your stuff for free forever?

Github will do exactly the same if that's at any point convenient to them. You are responsible for keeping your projects online/available/backed-up, if you don't have a contract with someone to do it for you.

[1] (so far that seems to be a still just a rumor/leak? No official confirmation afaik.)

@Bubu An update on GitLab's plan to start deleting "inactive" repos:

TL;DR they responded to community pressure following the critical coverage in the tech press and have cancelled the plan.


@strypey @Bubu thanks for the link, but as the article said, I now have even more questions as this has just added an extra layer of vagueness an uncertainty. I at least would create a mirror on Codeberg or spin a Gitea on a small VPS until I decide on what to do with this mess.

I understand the extra cost for their business, but the way forward is to create a tier between Free and Premium that is <$20/year and give users nothing extra other than 50 inactive repo


Given that Git was designed to decentralize development, it's intriguing that repo hubs like GH and GL have been all to induce such dependence. I recommend keeping local backups of all software on public repos, your own and anything it depends on as a minimum. Having a couple of official public homes for each repo is probably a good idea too.


Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon - NZOSS

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!