IT years are similar to dog years, an IT year is multiple normal human years, so 14 IT years is certainly IT decades.

algernon nods sagely

Sadly, that’s not code Linus wrote. Nor one he merged. (It’s from git, copied from rsync, committed by Junio)

There are no bugs. Just happy little accidental features.

It’s about 5 times longer than previous releases were maintained for, and is an experiment. If there’s a need for a longer term support branch, there will be one. It’s pointless to start maintaining an 5+ year branch with 0 users and a handful of volunteers, none of whom are paid for doing the maintenance.

So yes, in that context, 15 months is long.

Yes.

Forgejo has no official Windows builds, and since it is not tested on windows at all, it’s not guaranteed to work.

Fair bias notice: I am a Forgejo contributor.

I switched from Gitea to Forgejo when Forgejo was announced, and it was as simple as changing the binary/docker image. It remains that simple today, and will remain that simple for the foreseeable future, because Forgejo cherry picks most of the changes in Gitea on a weekly basis. Until the codebases diverge, that will remain the case, and Forgejo will remain a drop-in replacement until such time comes that we decide not to pick a feature or change. If you’re not reliant on said feature, it’s still a drop-in replacement. (So far, we have a few things that are implemented differently in Forgejo, but still in a compatible way).

Let me offer a few reasons to switch:

• Forgejo - as of today, and for the foreseeable future - includes everything in Gitea, but with more tests, and more features on top. A few features Forgejo has that Gitea does not:
  • Forgejo makes it possible to have any signed in user edit Wikis (like GitHub), Gitea restricts it to collaborators only. (Forgejo defaults to that too, but the default can be changed). Mind you, this is not in a Forgejo release yet, it will be coming in the next release probably in April.
  • Gitea has support for showing an Action status badge. Forgejo has badges for action statuses, stars, forks, issues, pull requests.
  • …there are numerous other features being developed for Forgejo that will not make it into Gitea unless they cherry pick it (they don’t do that), or reimplement it (wasting a lot of time, and potentially introducing bugs).
• Forgejo puts a lot of effort into testing. Every feature developed for Forgejo needs to have a reasonable amount of tests. Most of the things we cherry pick for Gitea, we write tests for if they don’t have any (we write plenty of tests for stuff originating from Gitea).
• Forgejo is developed in the open, using free tools: we use Forgejo to host the code, issues and releases, Forgejo Actions for CI, and Weblate for translations. Gitea uses GitHub to host the code, issues and releases, uses GitHub CI, and CrowdIn for translations (all of them proprietary platforms).
• Forgejo accepts contributions without requiring copyright assignment, Gitea does not.
• Forgejo routinely cherry picks from Gitea, Gitea does not cherry pick from Forgejo (they do tend to reimplement things we’ve done, though, a huge waste of time if you ask me).
• Forgejo isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, see the sustainability repo. There are people committed to working on it, there are people paid to work on it, and there’s a fairly healthy community around it already.

There’s a very important difference between what you can do with a thing, and what the thing was intended for, and what it is best at doing.

So then a Game Boy is a PC, and so is the SNES, and the SEGA Genesis. Cool, cool, makes perfect sense.

Myself, I think the wikipedia definition is far better than yours.

Yes, it can run all that. You may have to jump through a few hoops (just like in the case of the Steam Deck, just different hoops), but it can run all that.

I’ll also turn your question back to you: how many people use the Steam Deck for productivity, rather than for gaming, which is its intended purpose? And does it matter?

Like it or not, the steam deck is a gaming console, even if you can run non-game stuff on it too. Heck, even stuff like the Game Boy had (official!) accessories like the Game Boy Camera and Game Boy Printer, which were both useful outside of gaming. Does that stop the Game Boy from being a (retro) gaming console? There’s an ongoing project to provide productivity apps for the Game Boy (though, arguably, it did not ship yet, but you can extend the game boy with a cartridge in whatever way you can imagine).

Or, you can use your SNES as a MIDI Synthesizer (https://www.supermidipak.com/)! No modding or anything necessary, it’s just a regular cartridge. Can it be used for fun? Yes. Is it a game? No. You can do a lot of stuff with an SNES cartridge that has nothing to do with gaming. There was even a cartridge that let you play online games on the SNES (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBAND) - but not only games, it also let you read and write messages to other people. You didn’t need to go into “desktop mode”, nor install a browser, nor do anything special. You plugged in the cartridge, and it worked. It was far less locked down than the XBox or even the Steam Deck! Does that disqualify the SNES (or the game boy) from being a gaming console?

I disagree. It’s a gaming console. It is marketed as such. It’s primary purpose is to run games. By the way, you can browse on the Xbox. And because it has a full-blown browser, you can even use Office365 if you attach a keyboard and a mouse. So lets disqualify that too? :)

Aren’t all consoles like that, though? They all run mainstream operating systems, and are basically locked down PCs in a fancy box. If anything, the Steam Deck is further from a PC than an XBox/PS, due to being handheld, with an embedded screen and controller, while XBox and its friends require a display and an external controller (like a PC).

Steam Deck, because it is handheld, and can run a lot of my Steam games. I can also dock it to a big screen and attach a controller.

The single best thing I like about Zed is how they unironically put up a video on their homepage where they take a perfectly fine function, and butcher it with irrelevant features using CoPilot, and in the process:

• Make the function’s name not match what it is actually doing.
• Hardcode three special cases for no good reason.
• Write no tests at all.
• Update the documentation, but make the short version of it misleading, suggesting it accepts all named colors, rather than just three. (The long description clarifies that, so it’s not completely bad.)
• Show how engineering the prompt to do what they want takes more time than just writing the code in the first place.

And that’s supposed to be a feature. I wonder how they’d feel if someone sent them a pull request done in a similar manner, resulting in similarly bad code.

I think I’ll remain firmly in the “if FPS is an important metric in your editor, you’re doing something wrong” camp, and will also steer clear of anything that hypes up the plagiarism parrots as something that’d be a net win.