Because foss is usually not the easiest option. In fact it’s often quite difficult to maintain. So not only creating foss but then hosting your projects on foss is not tenable. Where does the line get drawn? OK you’re running forgejo. Are you running it on infrastructure that you control? You don’t control the DNS, you don’t control the ISP, you don’t control the fiber, you don’t control most of the stack. Putting something on GitHub is really inconsequential if you’re making your project open source since anyone can use it for anything anyway, so who controls the platform doesn’t matter in the slightest.

Self hosting takes time and energy and most open source developers join projects because they are interested in the project not becoming admins. On top of that building a CI system is an expensive undertaking when a lot of hosting solutions provide a fair amount of compute for free to qualifying projects.

I'd like to replace GitHub with something self hosted but I'd still like other people to be able to fork and especially do pull requests. Because everyone already has a GitHub account it's easy for them to do that. I wish there was some small software which would be easy to install and update and it would be connected to for example ActivityPub to be able to do pull requests. I'm not so keen on making everyone who wants to create a Issue or a Pull Request to make a seperate account on my own website, nobody will do that.

The biggest factor to me is developer attention. I had a project on gitlab and pushed a README.md with a link to the gitlab instance into github. I got about 10 times more reactions from github, incl. PRs (where the person had grabbed the code from gitlab and did a PR on github anyway) -- even in this setup. Mirroring a project to github tilts that even further.

Not being present on github means a lot less users and contributors. As long as that stays this way there is no way around github.

I hope federated forges can move some attention away from github, making other forges more visible... but I am not too optimistic :-(

Oh, yes we have. Gitlab, Codeberg, Notabug, etc. You can even host your own Gitea or Forgejo instance if you want.

Self-hosting is right out for most people. It's pretty expensive to even get started without compromising your home network (router with VLAN, switch, multiple servers (at least thinclients)), and then on top of that you need to maintain it, and can't really ever max out your download/upload speeds because people are depending on your internet to interact with the repo.

Gitlab is also for-profit, but also has blackouts and devs going rm -rf on the production DB. It's often in the news for bad things, so I've generally avoided it.

Codeberg is great for personal repos, but most smaller git hosting services have horrible SEO. Like I've had issues finding repos when searching for their exact name, if I had to use general search terms I'd only see github repos.

maybe if any of those open source github alternatives were actually any decent, most of the "github alternatives" I find don't even have a functioning search...

EDIT: I also find that github's discoverability (like this https://github.com/topics/activitypub?l=rust&o=desc&s=updated) is actually great I find so many cool projects using it

Because hosting shit yourself isn't free, and most people aren't up for taking financial losses for their projects.

How does it harm your privacy to git clone anonymously from github?

And not to forget that sketchy AI training on every line of your code.

I don't mind AI learning from my open-source code that much. However, my concern is that open-source projects on GitHub are not as easily accessible to AIs other than Copilot and OpenAI, which does not allow for fair competition.

That said, I do have a good impression of Codeberg. When they become federated, I might finally jump ship from GitHub.