FYI See: Mapping Code Forge specifications to Social Coding FSDL - #11 by aschrijver
The Free Software Development Lifecycle has been made part of the Discuss Social Coding and - depending how the ForgeFed specification project continues - the specs can be made part of that, and documentation added to the crowdsourced Social Coding website.
There are projects on fedi that excite me more than others, because they have a potential and opportunity that is tremendous when we act on the vision of what they could bring. All projects of course need to start with very modest beginnings. But also very often these beginnings steer the project direction such that the full potential is entirely overlooked. A kind of myopia sets in, and day-to-day technical struggles absorb all time to reconsider the broader context.
Such is the case too imho with ForgeFed, forgefriends community, and maybe the - not yet really started, but funded - Gitea federation project of the core team.
I transferred my comment from Forge Federation General chatroom to a Social Coding FSDL forum topic:
For cross reference.
i just wanted to add to this thread, as it was suggested multiple times that the future of forge-fed or itâs website and other important information could disappear - there are multiple reasons why that is nothing to worry about
i can understand the concern; but i believe that is due only to an unfortunate lack of public communication lately - the only communication from its former lead dev, was in the form of mastodon toots, and most people have not seen them - nothing was done when FENEAS shutdown, because there was already a backup forum setup on the activity-pub forum; though it would have been good to make some statement about that
there are several people who could manage forge-fed if needed - most of them had no idea that it the lead dev stopped working on it though - i learned only this week
the website is in no danger - that server has been running for many years before the forge-fed effort began - the same server also hosts several other peers websites and our email service - it is not going to disappear
the important thing to note regarding the important information, is that neither the website nor the forum has the important details - most everything discussed on the forum, which related to some work needing to be done, was mirrored as tickets on the notabug repo - notabug is no danger of disappearing either - the VCS repo is mirrored on many different hosts; and those notabug tickets are not essential
all of the important discussions regarding which features were desired, how they should/could be implemented, the project organization, the project license, everything, were conducted on a mailing list, which is archived on the frama website
i would suggest to anyone who is interested in implementing forge federation in any form, to read that entire mailing list - those discussion were quite comprehensive; and included developers and users alike - i consider that to be the primary resource, to learn what people generally want forge federation to be - there are few specifics; but most of the common debates that will arise were covered, what is possible while retaining maximal cross-forge and heterogeneous client compatibility, the pros and cons of various protocols, and so on
https://framalistes.org/sympa/info/git-federation
i could publish the raw MBOX, for those who prefer that
i would like to add an unrelated note about the forgeflux.org website
âForgeFed was an attempt to bring the best of both worlds together, but it required the forge developers (GitHub, GitLab, etc.) to participate in the development.â
firstly, i would have written that as âForgeFed is an attempt âŚâ - regardless of the current situation, there is rarely a reason to âthrow the baby out with the bath-waterâ - the CC0 license means that anyone who is interested can continue it - anyone who wants to implement forge federation in any form, would benefit from the requirements collected in the 2018 discussions; and whatever work that forge-fed has produced so far, would be a great start for an activity-pub based solution
there does seem to be some interest from implementers now; so it can continue, and it should continue - if implementers had been more interested in 2018 and retained their interest, there would be no doubts today - the forge developers who were involved at the time, saw it mainly as a nifty curiosity; but had little intention of federating their forges (with the exception of pagure, which was designed from the start, to federate with other instances of pagure) - forge-fed was left mainly in the hands of one person; and that person has laxxed on communicating well with the public recently - nothing dire has happened
secondly, it is not required for upstream forge developers to be interested at all - if that was true, we probably would not have tried so hard to make it a global community effort - at the time, there were plans for two different federated forges, written by peers community members - the same work would have been done; with or without any interest outside the peers group - it is just unfortunate that neither of those forges were completed
but more importantly, even forge-fed as it is, does not require participation from any forge upstream - anyone who is interested could fork the code for any libre forge, implement forge-fed for themselves, and publish the patches, auxiliary service, web-hooks, or whatever, for others to use - the only requirement for it to become a reality, is for interested parties (who ever they are) to decide to use the same protocol, to try avoiding a proliferation incompatible protocols
of course, for github users to benefit from forge-fed, that would require cooperation from itâs developers - but that is only because github is not libre
to be clear, neither of these points are specific to forge-fed - it was only being pedantic - this post is in defense of software freedom in general
Hello @bill-auger! Iâm one of the ForgeFlux developers 
Apologies for the inaccurate description, the CC0 feature is new to me. Iâve created a patch to make the necessary modifications to better describe forgefed. You are welcome to send comments on the PR. If you donât have a GitHub account, Iâll be more than willing to discuss the patch with you on this forum. 
Edit: old patch link is no longer relevant
its all good - i was not asking anyone to do anything - i appreciate that you took it to heart though
it is only seeing ideas like âit requires the upstreamâs cooperationâ that strike me the wrong way - i like to remind people that the only thing ârequiredâ from the upstream is a libre license - then anything is possible