Not a very serious option if you're looking for anyone from the 21st century to contribute to your project. No, the email workflow doesn't get better by just screaming "it's not that bad!" over and over again.
I'm looking forward to the federation work that is being done for forgejo, that will be big if it works out as it seems like it will.
Git is decentralized.
And if SourceHut disappears, what would you do with the repository? You’d upload it to a new forge, but how would you tell users where to find it, how would the users know this is the original source and not a hostile fork? It’s better to pick a stable, trustworthy. and 21st-century place like GitHub or GitLab instead of SourceHut.
It's better to not make yourself (much) dependent on functionalities that only the respective software forge provides.
There exist many ways for this. Why does this have to be the same provider (if you don't want to self-host this functionality) as the one that hosts the server for the VCS?
I would call expecting any developer to do it differently quite an entitled opinion. And DeVault has a way better track record on successful projects (some of which continue being successful after he moved on with the help of the communities he fostered) than any of us really.
Experience shows that it's very difficult to make a business work on top of open source software and he is doing it as we speak. Your complaint smells like a petty grudge in the face of all the other things that could be said about his projects.
> Not a very serious option if you're looking for anyone from the 21st century to contribute to your project. No, the email workflow doesn't get better by just screaming "it's not that bad!" over and over again.
Perhaps the maintainers of the respective project consider filtering out contributions from "hipster programmers" actually desirable for the project. :-)