An update from GitHub: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/159123#discussioncomment-13148279
The rates are here: https://docs.github.com/en/rest/using-the-rest-api/rate-limits-for-the-rest-api?apiVersion=2022-11-28
- 60 req/hour for unauthenticated users
- 5000 req/hour for authenticated - personal
- 15000 req/hour for authenticated - enterprise org
Good thing git is “federated” by default.
& then you have fossil which is github in a box
That’ just how the cookie crumbles.
No no! No no no no! No no no no! Baby, there’s no limit!
Amazon’s AI crawler is making my git server unstable
End of the day someone still has to pay for those requests
No, no limits, we’ll reach for the skyyyy
Dude, this is cool!
It works really well too. I have an instance.
Until there will be.
I think people are grossly underestimating the sheer size and significance of the issue at hand. Forgejo will very likely eventually get to the same point Github is at right now, and will have to employ some of the same safeguards.
Except Forgejo is open source and you can run your own instance of it. I do, and it’s great.
That’s a very accurate statement which has absolutely nothing to do with what I’ve said. Fact of the matter stands, is that those who generally seek to use a Github alternative do so because they dislike Microsoft or closed source platforms. Which is great, but those platforms with hosted instances see an overwhelmingly significant portion of users who visit because they choose not to selfhost. It’s a lifecycle.
- Create cool software for free
- Cool software gets popular
- Release new features and improve free software
- Lots of users use your cool software
- Running software becomes expensive, monetize
- Software becomes even more popular, single stream monetization no longer possible
- Monetize more
- Get more popular
- Monetize more
By step 30 you’re selling everyone’s data and pushing resource restrictions because it’s expensive to run a popular service that’s generally free. That doesn’t change simply because people can selfhost if they want.
To me, this reads strongly like someone who is confidently incorrect. Your starting premise is incorrect. You are claiming Forgejo will do this. Forgejo is nothing but an open source project designed to self host. If you were making this claim about Codeberg, the project’s hosted version, then your starting premise would be correct. Obviously, they monetize Codeberg because they’re providing a service. That monetization feeds Forgejo development. They could also sell official support for people hosting their own instances of Forgejo. This is a very common thing that open source companies do…
It just sounds like they didn’t understand the relationship between Forgejo and Codeberg. I didn’t either into I looked it up just now. IMHO their comment is best interpreted as being about Codeberg. People running their own instances of Forgejo are tangential to the topic at hand.
Either way, their comment is out of place. A Codeberg comment when the original comment was pointing people to Forgejo.
Obviously, they monetize Codeberg because they’re providing a service. That monetization feeds Forgejo development. They could also sell official support for people hosting their own instances of Forgejo. This is a very common thing that open source companies do…
This is literally what I said in my original post. Free products must monetize, as they get larger they have to continue to monetize more and more because development and infrastructure costs continue to climb…and you budged in as if this somehow doesn’t apply to Forgejo and then literally listed examples of why it does. I mean, Jesus my guy.
You are claiming Forgejo will do this.
I’m claiming that it is a virtual certainty of the age of technology that we live in that popular free products (like Github) eventually balloon into sizes which are unmanageable while maintaining a completely free model (especially without restriction), which then proceed to get even more popular at which time they have to find new revenue streams or die.
It’s what’s happened with Microsoft, Apple, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Amazon Prime Video, Discord, Reddit, Emby, MongoDB, just about any CMS CRM or forum software, and is currently happening to Plex, I mean the list is quite literally endless. You could list any large software company that provides a free or mostly free product and you’ll find a commercial product that they use to fund future development because their products become so popular and so difficult/costly to maintain they were forced into a monetization model to continue development.
Why you think Forgejo is the only exception to this natural evolution is beyond my understanding.
I’m fully aware of the difference between Codeberg and Forgejo. And Forgejo is a product and its exceptionally costly to build and maintain. Costs which will continue to rise as it has to change over time to suit more and more user needs. People seem to heavily imply that free products cost nothing to build, which is just insane.
I’ve been a FOSS developer for 25 years and a tech PM for almost 20. I speak with a little bit of authority here because it’s my literal wheelhouse.
That’s a huge wall of text to still entirely miss the point. Forgejo is NOT a free service. It is an open-source project that you can host yourself. Do you know what will happen if Forgejo ends up enshitifying? They’ll get forked. Why do I expect that? Because that’s literally how Forgejo was created. It forked Gitea. Why don’t I think that will happen any time soon? It has massive community buy-in, including the Fedora Project. You being a PM explains a lot about being confidently incorrect.
That’s a huge wall of text to still entirely miss the point.
So then it makes sense that you didn’t read it where I very specifically and intentionally touch the subjects you speak about.
If you’re not going to read what people reply, then don’t even bother throwing your opinion around. Just makes you look like an idiot tbh.
This going to fuck over obtanium?
Codeberg has used way stricter rate limiting since pretty much forever. Nice thought, but Codeberg will not solve this problem, like at all.
What? I have never seen a rate limiting screen on codeberg. Ever. If I click too much on github I get rate limited. It happens so frequently, I use https://sourcegraph.com/search when I have to navigate a repository’s code.
If Microsoft knows how to do one thing well, it’s killing a successful product.
I came here looking for this comment. They bought the service to destroy it. It’s kind of their thing.
Github has literally never been doing better. What are you talking about??
We are talking about EEE
What has Microsoft extinguished lately? I’m not a fan of Microsoft, but I think EEE is a silly thing to reference because it’s a strategy that worked for a little while in the 90s that Microsoft gave up on a long time ago because it doesn’t work anymore.
Like, what would be the purpose of them buying GitHub just to destroy it? And if that was their goal, why haven’t they done it already? Microsoft is interested in one thing: making money. They’ll do evil things to make money, just like any other big corporation, but they don’t do evil things just for the sake of being evil. It’s very much in their business interest to be seen as trustworthy, and being overly evil runs counter to that need.
RIP Skype
we could have had bob or clippy instead of ‘cortana’ or ‘copilot’
Microsoft really should have just leaned into it and named it Clippy again.
It was never named Clippy 😉
The numbers actually seem reasonable…
…
60 requests
Per hour
How is that reasonable??
You can hit the limits by just browsing GitHub for 15 minutes.
Without login
Not at all if you’re a software developer, which is the whole point of the service. Automated requests from their own tools can easily punch through this building a large project even one time.
I honestly don’t really see the problem here. This seems to mostly be targeting scrapers.
For unauthenticated users you are limited to public data only and 60 requests per hour, or 30k if you’re using Git LFS. And for authenticated users it’s 60k/hr.
What could you possibly be doing besides scraping that would hit those limits?
I hit those many times when signed out just scrolling through the code. The front end must be sending off tonnes of background requests
This doesn’t include any requests from the website itself
60 requests per hour per IP could easily be hit from say, uBlock origin updating filter lists in a household with 5-10 devices.
You might behind a shared IP with NAT or CG-NAT that shares that limit with others, or might be fetching files from raw.githubusercontent.com as part of an update system that doesn’t have access to browser credentials, or Git cloning over https:// to avoid having to unlock your SSH key every time, or cloning a Git repo with submodules that separately issue requests. An hour is a long time. Imagine if you let uBlock Origin update filter lists, then you git clone something with a few modules, and so does your coworker and now you’re blocked for an entire hour.
RIP yocto builds
LOL!!! RIP GitHub
The Go module system pulls dependencies from their sources. This should be interesting.
Even if you host your project on a different provider, many libraries are on github. All those unauthenticated Arch users trying to install Go-based software that pulls dependencies from github.
How does the Rust module system work? How does pip?
Compiling any larger go application would hit this limit almost immediately. For example, podman is written in go and has around 70 dependencies, or about 200 when including transitive dependencies. Not all the depends are hosted on GitHub, but the vast majority are. That means that with a limit of 60 request per hour it would take you 3 hours to build podman on a new machine.
@UnityDevice @sxan it doesn’t apply in that particular case since in Go you’ll by default download those modules through proxy.golang.org
Oh, that’s nice, TIL. But still, there are other projects that do just directly download from GitHub when building, buildroot for example.
@UnityDevice for sure, I was just nitpicking that Go projects in particular happens to be protected, at least as long as Google keeps providing that proxy…
I should know this, but I think Go’s module metadata server also caches, and the compiler(s) looks there first if you don’t override it. I remember Drew got pissed at Go because the package server was pounding on sr.ht for version information; I really should look into those details. It Just Works™, so I’ve never bothered to read up about how I works. A lamentable oversight I’ll have to correct with this new rate limit. It might be no issue after all.
I also remember there being a tiny shitstorm when Google started proxying package manager requests through their own servers, maybe two years ago or so. I don’t know what happened with that, though, or if it’s actually relevant here…
already not looking forward to the next updates on a few systems.
Yeah this could very well kill some package managers. Without some real hard heavy lifting.
scoop relies on git repos to work (scoop.sh - windows package manager)
Rip
Maybe charge OpenAI for scrapes instead of screwing over your actual customers.
The enshittification begins (continues?)…
just now? :)
Crazy how many people think this is okay, yet left Reddit cause of their API shenanigans. GitHub is already halfway to requiring signing in to view anything like Twitter (X).
They make you sign in to use search, on code anyways.
Which i hate so much anytime i want to quickly look for something
Github is owned by Microsoft, so don’t worry, it’s going to get worse
Probably because of AI agents. This is why we can’t have nice things.
