Why is the 'forgefed/forgefed' github repo empty?

people ask this often; so i will explain it for future reference

the reason why the ‘forgefed/forgefed’ github repo was not used is because koala, the creator of that repo, put a no-derivatives license in it when he created it’s README - the reason he added that particular license, was because he believed that it was the same license as activity-pub; and he had hoped that his repo would become the hub of activity surrounding forge federation efforts and collaboration

about a week later, it was decided that a mailing list should be created for some cross-project exploratory discussions - among the first topics discussed was licensing - at that point, fr33domlover had been researching activity-pub as a candidate for the vervis federation layer for some months prior, and others were keen on it also for its “fediverse” potential; but it was not yet clear that it was appropriate for complete forge federation - what soon became clear, was that the no-derivatives license was not the same as activity-pub anyways; and everyone, including koala, agreed that no work would be put under that license - the consensus on the mailing list was to use CC0, which was favored just slightly more than the other proposals - koala wanted to put it through a structured “condorcet” voting system though; and that came out as a tie - unfortunately, fr33domlover forgot to vote, which would have made CC0 the clear “condorcet” decision also

in reality, there was little contention about the license - most people would have been satisfied with any of the proposed options, simply because all of those allowed modifications - in any case, the only consequence of that vote was whether or not anyone would contribute to the github repo

that same day, after the voting closed with a tie, i suggested that we should either simply accept the previously established consensus of CC0, or that there should be another vote without delay, and that we should continue voting, repeatedly if necessary, until there was a clear decision - as i remember, there was no response from koala after that, and i dont think he has interacted with the github project since

as koala was the only one who was not satisfied with the standing consensus, and as he stopped participating without giving anyone write access to the github repo, and because no one wanted to contribute to a BDFL-managed project anyways, the github project became irrelevant

i dont know why some people seem to be unhappy about that - the idea of forge federation was not born with that github project (the original name was not ‘forge-fed’ either); and it did not end when the discussions petered out - the primary purpose of that github project was to bring people together from other projects, who were either interested in, discussing, or working on various federated/distributed software projects management tools; and it served that purpose quite well

it was a nice chapter in the story of forge federation, in which the inter-project requirements for the broadest compatibility were explored, and many people were introduced to the works of various related projects, who may not have been otherwise - the current chapter of the story is about making the story come true

the work toward uniform forge federation that is being done now, is using the vervis forge as the testbed for an emerging activity-pub based protocol - at this point, it could as well be named “the vervis interoperability protocol”; but people like the name ‘forge-fed’, so that will live on too


I think it’s due to the (unfortunate) fact that github is de facto the place where people search for open source projects, and find this one. (I myself came from this repository and had to search in the issues to find the real links to the project)

In order to replace the github-centric open source world with this awesome project of forge federation, I think that github should be used to promote the project, because it’s the place where most of the people will look for open source software.

It’s really sad that this pull request is not merged. Have koala been contacted to transfer the owning of the organisation ?

1 Like

@bill-auger, thank you for the detailed info we can now use for reference. I usually don’t have the patience to do the digging into the exact events :slight_smile:

Clarification: I’m using Vervis for prototyping ForgeFed, but I do the modeling using the existing forges such as Gitea and GitLab CE, and ForgeFed is meant for a much wider scope than just Vervis.

there is the small caveat that forge-fed is not software - it really does not need any VCS or forge - this forum or a mailing list would suffice for discussions, a wiki would suffice to allow remote collaboration on revisions, and the documents could be published on a plain old web server - i found it ironic that a github repo was created at all

also i think it is more likely that anyone who finds the github repo, was referred to it through a link from some other website - in which case that link could have been pointing anywhere where the work was being done - the best thing to do is to necro those old threads that are still leading people to github; and update them with a link to this forum or the website - it does not look like koala is ever going to return to maintain it; and again, there is really nothing that needs to be in a git repo

Been checking and I see yookoala have been doing some issues and PR on November and December, is it not possible to link him somehow? Would be so easy for him to just free it up…

I think they have been pinged many times…

1 Like

thanks for the clarification