Firejail caters for security enthusiasts, and yet the development platform is hosted by Microsoft -- a privacy abuser. To improve the credibility of the project and attract privacy-respecting developers, please consider moving away from Github.

@spamgourmet.com forwarding email address to track spam and to protect their more sensitive internal email address.
I suggest moving to Codeberg.org or Notabug.org.
briefly, some comments
you left out some other options
there are lots of issues
with selfhosting
also note about GitHub
at the same time I do agree with many of your points
I could only quote my answer from discussion about similar idea:
We have build community here on github. We have quite a lot more or less active contributors. Moving to different place would mean starting from scratch.
Beside that, I don't like those copy-paste rants sent to every project where 90% of content is irrelevant to the problem, like _MS spent $35 million on Facebook advertisements_ or _MS drug tests its employees_.
I consider myself "privacy-respecting developer" and I didn't think github abused my privacy for the time being.
github is effectively to a degree a network/discovery mechanism
To resolve this, it's commonplace to have a GitHub repo as a mirror.
with selfhosting
Surprised GitLab hasn't been mentioned. NotABug and Codeberg are rather esoteric; this is the first time I'm hearing of Codeberg.
To resolve this, it's commonplace to have a GitHub repo as a mirror.
Mirror is sufficient when you want get software, not when want to share issues and PRs.
I only have one question to @bruceleerabbit: creating an account on gitea or other instances has the same cost than creating a github account. If you create a github account, what can microsoft do with it ?
I host myself a gitea instance, but how can I say evveryone to subscribe into it ? And into every other instance of the project they want to be involved in ? When the ActivityPub standard will be on those projects, it will make things easier (see https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1612).
To resolve this, it's commonplace to have a GitHub repo as a mirror.
Mirror is sufficient when you want get software, not when want to share issues and PRs.
If the contribution guidelines stand out, this shouldn't be a problem.
I host myself a gitea instance, but how can I say evveryone to subscribe into it ? And into every other instance of the project they want to be involved in ? When the ActivityPub standard will be on those projects, it will make things easier (see go-gitea/gitea#1612).
If the contribution guidelines stand out, this shouldn't be a problem.
How you would handle PR on github in another platform? How would you convince all contributors to create account somewhere else?
If the contribution guidelines stand out, this shouldn't be a problem.
How you would handle PR on github in another platform?
You can still checkout PR's from GitHub.
How would you convince all contributors to create account somewhere else?
It seems odd to me for someone to be against making a GitLab account, but they offer a ton of sign-in options. Also someday federation and email, as mentioned above.
You can still checkout PR's from GitHub.
Not from web interface
It seems odd to me for someone to be against making a GitLab account, but they offer a ton of sign-in options. Also someday federation and email, as mentioned above.
It's still one thing to do more, also no notifications (and gitlab sucks with notifications).
As much as I would love to use GitLab instead of GitHub, I strongly disagree with most of the points above in support of moving.
GitHub serves our purpose and audience well and we've established a community here that moving to any other provider would disrupt (badly).
Until Microsoft directly impacts us/our code or makes it significantly difficult for our users to find and interact with us, I see not benefit in moving to a less-popular service that would make it significantly more difficult for our users to find and interact with us.
Plus, while MS hasn't had the best history with OSS in the past, in my opinion they have significantly improved today. In particular, I think the GitHub CEO they chose was a great choice who (hopefully) would do the right thing in the event MS did want to meddle with GitHub.
Please, let's leave (American) politics out of firejail! It doesn't have much relevance for those of us who aren't American and there's no point in alienating users or developers who are.
And if I may make a point about the MS drug testing... I personally prefer that the MS/GitHub employees who handle my account here and are responsible for keeping my code repos secure (and not allowing someone to commit to firejail in my name!) not expose my account because they were stoned and left some configuration incorrectly! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
I say this as someone who has happily moved to GitLab with my public (non-Fred Barclay) account even before the MS acquisition because i felt that GL was more suited for my needs than GH and also because I disagreed with some choices GH was making... but for now, I see no real benefit for us moving and a whole lot of downsides.
We'll stay on github until they kick us out! We'll keep an eye how things evolve, but moving will be a major disruption for everybody.
Tor: I get the same device verification screen even on the normal web if I don't login for a few days. Also when I go in from a different computer.
As much as I would love to use GitLab instead of GitHub,
Gitlab was not endorsed ("Gitlab (would be a poor choice)"), which implies you didn't really read the post.
GitHub serves our purpose and audience well and we've established a community here that moving to any other provider would disrupt (badly).
Of course. If the ethical path were simple and non-disruptive the unethical path wouldn't be the beaten path.
Until Microsoft directly impacts us/our code
As Microsoft discriminates against Catalonian people, it's obviously apathetic self-serving attitude to say "screw everyone else.. not my problem".
I see not benefit in moving to a less-popular service
Codeberg is the most popular of the ethical options.
MS hasn't had the best history with OSS in the past, in my opinion they have significantly improved today.
This is like Trump claiming he made a "legal phone call" as a defense for some calls being criminal.
Please, let's leave (American) politics out of firejail! It doesn't have much relevance for those of us who aren't American and there's no point in alienating users or developers who are.
If I strip out the "American politics" in connection with the American company you endorse, these issues remain:
That's 9 line items fewer - and enables you to neglect that fact that global players who partake in US surveillance capitalism ultimately end up abusing European's rights.
Do you think climate change only affects Americans?
Oppression of the Palestinians?
Oppression of the Catalonians?
And if I may make a point about the MS drug testing... I personally prefer that the MS/GitHub employees who handle my account here and are responsible for keeping my code repos secure (and not allowing someone to commit to firejail in my name!) not expose my account because they were stoned and left some configuration incorrectly! stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye
Europeans are smarter than Americans on that. In Europe it's doctors, not privacy abusing and unqualified emloyers, who determine a worker's medical fitness for work, and rightly so.
Drug tests are easy to beat. At the same time employers have a false confidence in the results and consequently neglect to pay attention or notice signs of drug abuse. Drug testing in the US is done to discriminate against lifestyle - it's ineffective in detecting impairment on the job.
If you're worried about drug-impaired people handling your data, you should choose a European service, where employers pay more attention to on-the-job performance than relying a test that tells them what employees are doing outside of the workplace.
@bruceleerabbit I read your post several times. All other issues aside, @netblue30 is the main dev here. If he says we're not moving then we're not moving.
You were already requested not to bring politics into this software tool discussion. I'm locking this. If any other collaborator wants to unlock then that's perfectly alright, I just don't want this to continue.
Most helpful comment
As much as I would love to use GitLab instead of GitHub, I strongly disagree with most of the points above in support of moving.
GitHub serves our purpose and audience well and we've established a community here that moving to any other provider would disrupt (badly).
Until Microsoft directly impacts us/our code or makes it significantly difficult for our users to find and interact with us, I see not benefit in moving to a less-popular service that would make it significantly more difficult for our users to find and interact with us.
Plus, while MS hasn't had the best history with OSS in the past, in my opinion they have significantly improved today. In particular, I think the GitHub CEO they chose was a great choice who (hopefully) would do the right thing in the event MS did want to meddle with GitHub.
Please, let's leave (American) politics out of firejail! It doesn't have much relevance for those of us who aren't American and there's no point in alienating users or developers who are.
And if I may make a point about the MS drug testing... I personally prefer that the MS/GitHub employees who handle my account here and are responsible for keeping my code repos secure (and not allowing someone to commit to firejail in my name!) not expose my account because they were stoned and left some configuration incorrectly! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
I say this as someone who has happily moved to GitLab with my public (non-Fred Barclay) account even before the MS acquisition because i felt that GL was more suited for my needs than GH and also because I disagreed with some choices GH was making... but for now, I see no real benefit for us moving and a whole lot of downsides.