Re: Please review codeberg.org

[Yuchen Pei]

bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> writes:

> On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 20:33:59 -0400 Richard wrote:
> >   >   Does not recommend SaaSS services, operated by other 
> >   >   hosts. (A5)  
> >
> >   >   Any recommended SaaSS services operated by the same host, 
> >   >   also
> >   >   pass all 'C' criteria. (C7)  
> >
> > Why make this distinction?  I just don't see the reason to.
>
> that was to illuminate, that all forges on this list, and under
> review, are SaaSS, without exception - the entire purpose of 
> this
> list is to recommend SaaSS - that may not have been so obvious
> when this list was created; but it is today

I'm not sure if this is true. Assuming a forge is a service that 
hosts your git repositories / publishes commits and provides a 
space for communication through issue trackers which are glorified 
mailing lists. Then it is almost the same as a blogging site for 
people to host their blogs with the following (loose) analogies:

- Blogposts <-> commits
- Comments <-> issues

The essay defining SaaSS argues that blogging or microblogging 
services are not SaaSS:

> The original idea of web servers wasn't to do computing for you, 
> it was to publish information for you to access. Even today this 
> is what most web sites do, and it doesn't pose the SaaSS 
> problem, because accessing someone's published information isn't 
> doing your own computing. Neither is use of a blog site to 
> publish your own works, or using a microblogging service such as 
> Twitter or StatusNet. (These services may or may not have other 
> problems, depending on details.) The same goes for other 
> communication not meant to be private, such as chat groups.

A forge defined this way does hosting / publishing and 
communication only, not computation, thus it should not be 
considered SaaSS.

Best,
Yuchen

--
PGP Key: 47F9 D050 1E11 8879 9040  4941 2126 7E93 EF86 DFD0

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature