Forgejo 与荷兰政府的会议记录,通过 Git 提交记录。
Meeting notes between Forgejo and the Dutch government via Git commits

原始链接: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/sustainability/pulls/137/files

## Forgejo 与荷兰政府合作 - 会议纪要 (2025年11月11日) 本次通话是荷兰政府(内政部)与 Forgejo 团队之间关于潜在合作的初步讨论。政府旨在提高开源软件的采用率,从代码平台开始,并希望了解如何*支持* Forgejo 的开发。 Forgejo 贡献者强调了该项目的社区驱动特性、联合管理能力以及易于贡献(使用 Go 编写)。他们澄清了与 Gitea 的关系——一次硬分叉,目前没有合作。 讨论中提出对贡献功能的长期维护以及与组织建立共生关系的需求的担忧。 规模化是一个关键议题,Gusted 基于其 Codeberg 基础设施工作提供了专业知识。 目前的资金来自捐赠和 Codeberg 的拨款,政府资助可能面临官僚主义方面的挑战。 政府对使用 OpenID Connect 的联合实例表示兴趣,这源于最近的供应商锁定事件(微软账户封锁)以及对数字主权的高度关注。双方同意通过 Codeberg 讨论保持开放沟通,并探索政府贡献的途径,主要通过开发人员时间而非直接资金。

## Forgejo 与荷兰政府的讨论 最近通过 Codeberg 的 Git 提交分享的会议记录显示,Forgejo 与荷兰政府就潜在采用 Forgejo 作为自托管 Git 平台进行了讨论。对话强调了对“数字主权”的渴望,以及避免对微软(GitHub)等商业实体的依赖。 最初曾考虑过 Gitea,但由于 Forgejo 的许可变更(从 MIT 到 GPLv3)以及由此产生的维护负担(硬分叉导致),产生了一些担忧。一些人认为这会影响安全性和与 Gitea 的功能对等性,而另一些人则认为 Forgejo 的许可是一种反对企业剥削开源贡献的道德立场。 荷兰政府的兴趣源于对一个符合开源原则的平台的需求,并且可能对数据和代码提供更大的控制权。讨论还涉及了 CI/CD 集成,Forgejo 的 agent 获得了积极的反馈。最终,决定似乎取决于技术能力和持续开发,一些人提倡直接比较发布说明以评估每个平台的进展。
相关文章

原文
@ -0,0 +1,305 @@ #import "@preview/flow:0.3.2": * #show: note.with( title: "Forgejo Dutch Government call notes", jitsi: [https://meet.jit.si/ForgejoOSPObzk], start: "2025-11-11 14:00", end: "15:00", protocol: (contributors: ( "multisn8", "n0toose", "oliverpool" )) ) #pagebreak(weak: true) = Introduction round / Gina: Gi - Ministry of the interior - Goal: More open-source - OpenDesk already is in Germany, now also in Netherlands - Short-term goal: Setting up a code platform - This call - Figuring out how governments can _help_ Forgejo! yay :3 - Do also work together with the French government / Gusted: Gu - Basically a Forgejo contributor since its inception. Also: Computers. Since a long time. - Forgejo has no higher "level" than contributor / oliverpool: O - Forgejo contributor - Would enjoy having paid OSS missions to sell to his employer - Has had contact with French ministry of education: Want to use Forgejo, too - want to move away from GitLab community edition - some paid features cannot be accepted as contributions to the community edition - are considering Forgejo - but the gitlab-pages migration is not easy - (Context for protocol: Also made contributions to the notes after the meeting took place.) / Multi: M - just takes notes lol / n0toose: N - Forgejo contributor - (note taker's audio feed was interrupted, *N* cannot remember what was said.) - (Context for protocol: Also made contributions to the notes after the meeting took place.) = Pronunciation / N: Whatever (joke) / Gu: Forgejo with a silent R - Coming from Esperanto = What is Forgejo about? / O: Important part of Forgejo: Community and federation - Federation is _not_ developed by the ones present here / Gi: Non-centralized power - Is also on Codeberg = Agenda / Gi: What the Dutch government... + *wants from* Forgejo + *can do for* Forgejo = What the Dutch government wants from Forgejo / Gi: - So far, nothing that isn't already present - Except: CI == CI / Gu: Supports a lot of CI runners - Forgejo Actions is built-in - Reimpl of GH Actions from scratch - Still in dev: Works towards feature-parity - Limitations already visible though - Difficult with more complex pipelines / Gi: How easy is adding features? - Both code and requests? / Gu: Easy enough - "I think as long as there's a use case, it will be accepted" - Architecture makes it easy enough / O: Written in Go, quite approachable - Expect all contributions to be tested - Maintainers help out with getting a feature there though!! :3 - Contribution acceptance depends on inherent maintenance effort - Don't want features that must be dropped after 3 months due to lack of maintenance - Other CIs can work with Forgejo as well. - SourceHut: Can trigger CI runs quite easily - https://codeberg.org/emersion/yojo -- bridge between Sourcehut and Forgejo - Woodpecker == Volunteers vs. commercial interests / Gi: Are you entirely volunteer-based? / N: Depends on who "you guys" (Context: this meeting's attendees or Forgejo's contributors) is - Even if a contributor works on behalf of a company, the assumption is that their contributions are treated like any other's. "We" expect that we can work together, instead of a mere "push and forget" approach. - Hard part of contributions are tests and maintenance - Symbiotic relationship is _necessary_ - *Gu*: Expect maintenance and availability for questions if code is added - Companies are contributing, too! - They don't always say it out loud though ^^ / Gi: Is there any payment structure? / O: Individual entities have NLnet grants - Codeberg has some, too == Forgejo <> Gitea relation / Gi: How does Forgejo relate to Gitea? / N: (jokingly) We went "solo". / Gu: - In inception: Soft fork - A year ago: Hard fork (after final rebase) - Since then, cherry-picking - No relationship with Gitea anymore except for past commit history / O: https://forgejo.org/2024-02-forking-forward/ - No relation except for security releases - Attempts at cooperation and coordination did not work out qwq == Experience with large institutions/governments / Gi: Have you worked with governments before? / Gu: No - Contributors tell in private or present publicly that they are in a company - But always individuals - Except for Linux distros / Gi: Do you get support requests from them? / Gu: Yes, but usually rather technical questions - e.g. "Why is this slow?", "How can I profile this?" - Result in issues like any other / O: - Forgejo Actions: Pushed by individual contributors - Federation: Pushed by company - Apart from that: Smaller stuff - 1 contributor "suffices" for each === Support contracts/obligations / Gi: - Not worried about features - Worried about having to provide support though - Unsure if 3rd party support contract would be necessary / Gu: Companies figure out in #emoji.sparkles some way #emoji.sparkles [Another forgejo contributor joins and leaves] / O: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/professional-services/issues - Companies can request and offer services there - Each company has to decide for themselves if they need them [Another forgejo contributor joins and leaves] [Another forgejo contributor joins] == Concerns about working together with a government / Gi: Are there any concerns about a government starting to use the project? / N: We need to figure some questions (i.e. scaling) before that, "we can figure things out as we go" - Very often, a large organization might start using Forgejo and stumble upon issues after the fact. / Gu: OSS: Some contributors may not be excited/positive as far as governments are concerned - Others treat them as "yet another organization". [Another forgejo contributor leaves] / Gi: Fair! Governments have not fulfilled that symbiotic pact in the past - only "taking", but not "giving back" as much. == Dedicated scaling talk / Gi: - We're starting a pilot! #emoji.confetti - Would be cool to talk dedicatedly about scaling - Could we set that up? / N: (half-jokingly) "I nominate gusted" / Gu: I do infra for Codeberg, so I'd be the right one for this / O: 👏 / Gi: Phrasing it carefully to avoid draining energy - Gusted would be a great first start / N: Work to use Forgejo as a cluster: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/259 == Funding / Gi: Is NLnet and Codeberg all funding you receive? / N: No - Haven't had financial transparency reports in the past - Primary source: donations, (single-time, memberships) - Would have to check in with the other Codeberg entities first - (Context: There was a mild misunderstanding with the _you_, so the answer was "on behalf of Codeberg" and not on behalf of Forgejo). - Mentions of how some organizations/companies can "contribute back to Forgejo" by allocating human resources. / Gu: Codeberg is freely allocating funds for Forgejo / O: Complimentary with different goals - Forgejo: Develop Forgejo - Codeberg: Moderation, promote open source, have an OSS code platform, ... [Another forgejo contributor joins] = How could a government help Forgejo? / Gi: Broadly asking: If a government wants to support you, how could they do it? - Developers? - Funds? - Hardware? / O: - Funds: Complicated with tax paperwork and legal issues though - People interested in contributing: Easier + more effective / Gi: - Actually glad: Money is hard to move in governments == Federation / Gi: - How is the federation work going? / N: Lots of work - Plugging a lot of things out and back in, tech debt over several projects - Cannot make any guarantees - More pressure is bad - TL;DR: It's slow, but going. It's complicated. / Gi: Impressed with the ambition, understand that it's hard / N: The goal is to move from having "yet another single point of failure" (i.e. SourceForge, then GitHub, then Codeberg, etc.) - "Just gonna take a while" / Gi: Basic plan: Want to have our own instance - Would be cool to federate though! - Use OpenID connect login - Technical details though - Happy to hear you're open for collaboration! / N: Everyone (companies, governments, big instances like Codeberg's, etc.) benefits! ^^ = Closing questions == Code of Conduct / M: How would CoC work with government projects like this? / Gi: Individual projects figure that out -- we don't have experience with OSS yet == Keeping in touch / Gi: How can we keep in touch? / O: If you have a CB account, you can comment on https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/412 - Easier to work with if it's in public == Protocol confirmation / N: Are you okay with this protocol being public? / Gi: Yes, I am == Motivation for Dutch government to contact Forgejo / Gi: This a good start, are there any questions? / Gu: What was the primary motivation for switching away from proprietary platforms? / Gi: ICC having their MS accounts blocked - Made them very aware of ecosystem fragility - Looked at their dependencies and alternatives - Digital sovereignty: Hot topic ^^ == Next steps / O: What would be the next step? / Gi: (mentions of red tape/bureaucracy that has to be dealt on OSPO's end) - Seeing how this can work out with e.g. different departments. - 80% bureaucracy, 20% actual stuff. - Seeing how we can contribute back to you (and other projects). - "Lots of work on our part!"
联系我们 contact @ memedata.com