Hello Gusted, thanks for coming back to us! I understand that Guix poses a lot of strain on the Codeberg infrastructure and that we need to work together to find solutions.
Am Sun, May 31, 2026 at 12:02:12AM +0200 schrieb Gusted: > I would like to raise awareness to Codeberg's recent change in quotas groups > [0]. This itself has no effect to Guix, but this did result in that users > that registered since two days ago are no longer able to fork > https://codeberg.org/guix/guix as this is more than 750 MiB of storage and > forks are simply not de-duplicated [1]. I do not quite understand what is meant by [1], which speaks of private repositories and attached quotas. Guix is obviously public; are publicly visible forks of a GPL project not also public - in this case I do not see how [1] would apply - or do they count as private? Do they count towards a putative Guix quota, or towards the person's quota who made the fork? Actually I have already heard complaints by an (unsuccessful) new contributor that they were unable to fork, which sheds a bad light on Guix and on Codeberg as having unreliable or not working infrastructure. > This doesn't mean new users aren't able to contribute anymore, they can > still do that with the AGit workflow [2], which allows you to create a pull > request without needing a fork. However in the current UI no mention of AGit > is being made... as such I would like to propose that the fork button is > turned to a link to the AGit workflow documentation. Personally I do not think that this is what we would like to see. I have nothing against advertising Agit if it makes things easier for Codeberg, but we should not force it on people. I suppose that there already is or could be a policy to delete forks or even accounts that have not been touched in a certain amount of time, say a year? The move to Codeberg was motivated by a will to "modernise" and to "do things as other projects do" and "what people are used to" (read: Github), to make it easier for new contributors to take part. This means we have to provide the usual workflow of forking and creating pull requests from forks; if we want unusual or arcane approaches, that is where we came from ;-) There was discussion whether Guix Foundation could not make financial contributions to Codeberg to help run "our part" of the infrastructure. I am not sure whether this has been put in place, but would it be a possible avenue? I suppose it would help with infrastructure costs, but not necessarily with the labour put in by volunteers. We could also ask ourselves in Guix the question whether we should host our own Forgejo instance; but given our lack of sysadmin power, I do not think that this would be a reasonable solution. Andreas
