Latest revision as of 22:05, 16 April 2024
This is the GNU Ethical Repository Criteria Evaluations (ERC) evaluation checklist for Codeberg, as compiled by the Community Workgroup for Libre Forge Software and Ethical Repository Hosts.
The text of each criteria in the checklist table is a hyper-link to the relevant section of the ERC.
Please send any questions or comments to the repo-criteria-discuss mailing list.
| ERC Checklist for Codeberg
|
|---|
|
☑
|
C0 - Freely licensed JS for essential features
|
|
☑
|
C0-0 - Either: 'B0' with CCS for client-code scripts, or 'A0'
|
|
☑
|
C0-1 - Libre interpreters, "trans-pilers", and input sources
|
|
☑
|
C1 - No non-free client requirements
|
|
☑
|
C2 - No discrimination
|
|
☑
|
C3 - Tor access
|
|
☑
|
C4 - Non-odious TOS
|
|
☑
|
C5 - Recommends GPLv3-or-later
|
|
☑
|
C6 - HTTPS access
|
|
☐
|
B0 - Compatible with LibreJS (or equivalent tool)
NOTES: some scripts are not labeled, uses the name "MIT" for expat license.
|
|
☑
|
B1 - No tracking
|
|
☐
|
B2 - Does not encourage unclear licensing
NOTES: no diff between GPLv3 and GPLv3-or-later repositories https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2021-06/msg00022.html
|
|
☐
|
B2-0 - Explains each of the licensing options
NOTES: TODO - new v1.2 criteria (2024) needs review
|
|
☐
|
B2-1 - Explains the importance of license notices
NOTES: TODO - new v1.2 criteria (2024) needs review
|
|
☑
|
B3 - Does not recommend non-free licenses
|
|
☑
|
A0 - Fully-functional without client-side scripts
|
|
☑
|
A1 - Freely-licensed server-side code
|
|
☐
|
A2 - Prefers GPLv3-or-later projects
NOTES: It encourages all free software licenses equally, copyleft and non-copyleft.
|
|
☑
|
A3 - Offers AGPLv3-or-later
|
|
☑
|
A4 - Does not permit non-free licenses
|
|
☐
|
A5 - Does not recommend SaaSS
NOTES: TODO
|
|
☐
|
A6 - Does not mention “Open Source”
NOTES: No, as they use the neutral term "Free and Open Source Software" and "Open Source", like in their Mission Statement: https://blog.codeberg.org/codebergorg-launched.html
|
|
☐
|
A7 - Clearly endorses software freedom
NOTES: No, as it's a mix. In their mission statement they say "Open Source" and "Free and Open Source Software": https://blog.codeberg.org/codebergorg-launched.html. On the other hand, their "What is Codeberg?" page unilaterally says "Free Software": https://docs.codeberg.page/getting-started/what-is-codeberg/
|
|
☑
|
A8 - Refers to GNU/Linux, wherever applicable
|
|
☐
|
A9 - Requires thorough and clear licensing
NOTES: No.
|
|
☑
|
A-plus 0 - Registration not required
|
|
☐
|
A-plus 1 - No logging
NOTES: The server log files can contain client IP addresses and user agent strings from connecting computers. However, these log files are destroyed automatically within at most seven days.(Source: https://codeberg.org/codeberg/org/src/branch/master/PrivacyPolicy.md )
|
|
☑
|
A-plus 2 - Follows EFF guidelines
|
|
☐
|
A-plus 3 - Conforms to WCAG standard
NOTES: TODO
|
|
☐
|
A-plus 4 - Conforms to WAI-ARIA standard
NOTES: No. It may not be an Accessible Rich Internet Application, but it's an easy to navigate website for hosting projects.
|
|
☐
|
A-plus 5 - Complete data exportability
NOTES: No. It might be possible one day though.(Does git count?)
|
|
☐
|
A-plus 6 - Prefers AGPLv3-or-later projects
NOTES: TODO
|
|
☐
|
A-plus 7 - Helps or reminds users to put license notices
NOTES: No, A+7 is something of an ideal. It would take a lot of work for any forge.
|
Evaluation messages:
