Hi, Peter the Founder of Pushin.eu here. Sorry, the website escaped containment and landed on HN before I had the chance to update the "marketing materials" aka. landing page. So, here are a few points:
*The product is stable, but still in development. That's why some of the core things like pricing, etc. are missing. BUT:*
1. Business Model: Pushin will have subscriptions for individuals and teams. Pricing is not yet decided but it'll be close to GitHub/GitLab pricing.
2. Privacy: In true German fashion, we *don't* want your private data. Pushin doesn't track anything beyond the obvious: email, password hash, username, whatever information you put on your profile.
3. Roadmap: We're currently in Beta, but everything looks good so far. We'll probably go GA beginning of 2027. I'll focus on delivering the core features first and make sure that they are polished and of good quality before moving on to the nice-to-haves.
4. I say "we" but it's really only me (Peter Ullrich, peterullrich.com) and my dog (Bella, Labrador, beige). "We" are not VC funded, but bootstrapping on bare metal Scaleway servers. My wish is for this to become a proper company soon though.
5. Tech-stack: Elixir (Phoenix + LiveView) for most parts, Rust for the Git parts, S3-compatible buckets and Postgres on Scaleway, servers are bare metal Scaleway servers running in Paris.
6. Git implementation: Just like Tangled, I've used Rust and the gitoxide libraries to build a Git implementation that's fully compatible with the canonical Git CLI, but uses S3-compatible buckets as storage instead of keeping the entire repo on disk. I'll write in-depth about this soon, but it's very much what Tangled did, just with a different storage concept.
I gotta be honest that I'm both scared but also excited that Pushin hit HN. I wish we'd be better prepared, but here we are. Many thanks to anyone who is willing to try it out!
Hey Peter, that's a very cool idea. I think (digital) sovereignty doesn't just happen, it's something we need to build and that's how we do it. It's a bit like "local first". Looking forward to using it once it launches :)
Well as soon as your pricing is available and full onboarding is done, I will be pushing for it at work. We just left bitbucket and I have everything stored locally until we find an alternative and I just found it.
Congratulations! I'm hooked.
The AI slop block is what I like to learn more about. The FAQ does not include AI slop. Can you elaborate a bit on it please.
I just added a new FAQ item for that, but I'll copy it here as well:
We plan to reduce low-quality contributions through several features, some already in place and others still to come. Invite-only registration helps us discourage low-quality accounts and confirm that new members are real people. Next, we plan to introduce a vouching system, similar to Tangled's, that lets contributors build a reputation. We'll combine that reputation with other signals to assess new pull requests and issues. Contributions that appear low quality will be clearly marked and de-emphasized, while maintainers will make the final decision. We also plan to limit how many pull requests and issues a new contributor can open in repositories they don't own. This will be an ongoing effort, but the goal is simple: maintainers stay in control of their queues.
Ironic really because that was the original idea behind Git - to build a tree of trusted developers for the Linux kernel. Linus has those immediately below him that he trusts will push good quality code, and those folks do the same with their group of contributors.
> Invite-only registration helps us
If this is invite-only, then what you're doing is emulating the original strategy of Linus: only certain folks have commit rights. Extend that out to only certain folks have PR-creation rights and you're done. Maintainers select those that can contribute, these folks in-turn, select those that can contribute to the project, rinse and repeat.
Let everyone create issues and implicitly ignore these because any issue that doesn't make it passed the "acceptance level of a maintainer" will naturally be ignored and disappear. As is the case over at GH - issues naturally suffocate because no maintainer gives them air.
Perhaps have a special category "untrusted/toxic PRs" for contributors who don't belong in the tree of trust. These PRs are handled in a toxic-proof containment environment, i.e., they get particular vetting attentions by maintainers. Obviously this would be a path into the "tree of trust" for a project.
Then each project can also implicitly define what is "low quality" for their project - it's how they handle the "toxic PRs".
EDIT:
That's also why branching and forking is so cheap in Git: each sub-maintainer can maintain their own fork with it's branches before pushing up changes to the main fork. (Compare branching using RCS/CVS or Subversion to Git to get a feeling of "cheap" ;))
This can be done over at GH if a fork would be actively maintained by a sub-maintainer and every X days/weeks/months they would push the entire changes of the fork to the main repository. That would be closer to the Linux development strategy - as I understand it.
> Pushin doesn't track anything beyond the obvious: email, password hash, username, whatever information you put on your profile
This seems poorly worded or genuinely concerning. Why do you want to track my email, username or anything in my profile. What do you do with it? How do you track it?
"Track" means "store" here and we need to store it for authentication (email+password hash) and to show your public profile (e.g. https://pushin.eu/pjullrich). So, regular things, not tracking you for data mining stuff
If I want to create an account not to host repositories, but only to report bugs by opening issues in a repository of an application I'm using, do I still need an invitation code?
Yes, we can't block models from scraping the public repos and train on them, but *we* won't use your code (neither public nor private) to train models on them. We really only want to host your code and do that well.
Yes, sorry this escaped containment before I was able to update the landing page. Since the product is in invite-only beta still, I focused on the UX of the platform instead of the "marketing materials" aka. Landing page
Trust is not "marketing materials". Folks trust that you keep those promises, that their code ist safe. Your product is trust, not the application. Code and application are just the vehicle to deliver that.
I'm very much aware of that and I've put all my effort into making the application trustworthy first. That means: Not a single byte must ever get lost. Since the website wasn't updated for the general public when it hit HN, these trust signals (e.g. privacy policy, ToS, info on business model) are/were missing. Sorry about that!
So often when something launches, these are missing. And it always really surprises me. People apparently just sign up for such services, but I would want to know these details in advance before doing so.
This looks really nice! I'm interested in how the CI works though. One thing that annoys me about existing CI is that it's difficult to run locally and relatedly, config files don't work cross platform.
I'd love a CI platform that just used a super thin docker + script driver. Rather than platform specific YAML files that define steps.
Regardless of that, these don't seen to play for the same audience.
Codeberg Terms of Use[^0] makes it clear that it's only for "projects covered by a licence for free and open source software, free and open source hardware, or free cultural works", and "You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools". They also only provide private repos where the FOSS system need it for their infra or what not, and not just for any purpose.
These are totally fine for Codeberg to do, and it's wonderful for FOSS!!
However it is not a viable place for many projects that are on GitHub/GitLab now and would want to migrate, say: any commercial project, that would need "permission-free" private repos, or when the teams want to decided themselves how much generative AI their developers should use, not their Git-hosting provider...
I didn't get that either until I read this comment. I read "pushin" as one word, figured it was a made up proper name for a product.
Once upon a time, I, too, had a domain where the TLD was part of the actual name and required to read it correctly (think something like foobar-pl.us). In my experience this left most people confused and I abandoned that quite quickly.
I'll introduce subscriptions soon, we're currently still in invite-only beta, but the subscriptions will be very much like GitHub/GitLabs with individual and team pricing.
I feel author might not realize how much this will lead to its death and probably also current visitors that sees this (in its current state - aka design seen 1M times with virtually zero work on branding done) might never return.
Why is it any of your business how I do or don't describe my repos? (Genuine question, it seems like a really weird demand to impose on other people for no particular reason)
I self-hosted Pushin on my own Forgejo instance on a Hetzner bare metal server before Pushin was ready and it was a great experience to be honest! Self-hosting Forgejo is great!
Thank you! Sorry about that, this post on HN caught me before it was ready. Upload limits are: 5GB for logs, 5GB for artifacts, 10 GB cache. These limits will probably change once I introduce a paid trier (same limits there, lower limits on the free tier)
I don't like vibe coding myself, but I love AI assisted development, my new bottleneck is no longer the search for syntax and features but my understanding. Am I welcome on your platform?
I was never really blockchain-something. It was all the hype when I finished my software engineering masters (around 2017/18), so to understand the technology better I started a Podcast and wrote my master thesis about it. I never used it or worked in it afterwards though and I never thought it'd become more than a scam unfortunately
There has to be a more thorough solution here. The current form of EU is betraying EU citizens to the USA - we already saw this and were astonished how Leyen insta-submitted to the orange clown. This can no longer be explained by "better business deals", since this is systematic. So, Europe depending on the USA is a lose-lose scenario for EU citizens, including the lack of nuclear arsenal on an EU-wide basis. We see this right now with Putin committing his genocide - he knows that agent Krasnov will never do anything against him. So these isolated strategies such as "xyz never leaving Europe" is fine as a first step, but it needs to be integrated into a cohesive overall strategy, including doing something about US mega-corporations that are extremely hostile to european interests - aka Google, Facebook and so forth. At the very least the EU should help fund open source alternatives much more in a systematic manner, from A to Z. Even that in and by itself is not an overarching strategy, but it is the first two steps towards one.
I wouldn't want to host software, or really any published work, in a legal regime that doesn't have something equivalent to the American first amendment.
And many people wouldn’t want to host in America because the first amendment doesn’t really protect you from the whims of the US government, which at the moment are pretty fucking random, and the US government gives itself rights to access any/everything hosted by US companies.
Hi, Peter the Founder of Pushin.eu here. Sorry, the website escaped containment and landed on HN before I had the chance to update the "marketing materials" aka. landing page. So, here are a few points:
*The product is stable, but still in development. That's why some of the core things like pricing, etc. are missing. BUT:*
1. Business Model: Pushin will have subscriptions for individuals and teams. Pricing is not yet decided but it'll be close to GitHub/GitLab pricing.
2. Privacy: In true German fashion, we *don't* want your private data. Pushin doesn't track anything beyond the obvious: email, password hash, username, whatever information you put on your profile.
3. Roadmap: We're currently in Beta, but everything looks good so far. We'll probably go GA beginning of 2027. I'll focus on delivering the core features first and make sure that they are polished and of good quality before moving on to the nice-to-haves.
4. I say "we" but it's really only me (Peter Ullrich, peterullrich.com) and my dog (Bella, Labrador, beige). "We" are not VC funded, but bootstrapping on bare metal Scaleway servers. My wish is for this to become a proper company soon though.
5. Tech-stack: Elixir (Phoenix + LiveView) for most parts, Rust for the Git parts, S3-compatible buckets and Postgres on Scaleway, servers are bare metal Scaleway servers running in Paris.
6. Git implementation: Just like Tangled, I've used Rust and the gitoxide libraries to build a Git implementation that's fully compatible with the canonical Git CLI, but uses S3-compatible buckets as storage instead of keeping the entire repo on disk. I'll write in-depth about this soon, but it's very much what Tangled did, just with a different storage concept.
I gotta be honest that I'm both scared but also excited that Pushin hit HN. I wish we'd be better prepared, but here we are. Many thanks to anyone who is willing to try it out!
Hey Peter, that's a very cool idea. I think (digital) sovereignty doesn't just happen, it's something we need to build and that's how we do it. It's a bit like "local first". Looking forward to using it once it launches :)
Thank you and I absolutely agree! Pushin is merely one building block. We need a European-centric push in many products.
Well as soon as your pricing is available and full onboarding is done, I will be pushing for it at work. We just left bitbucket and I have everything stored locally until we find an alternative and I just found it.
Love your tech stack! Elixir and Phoenix will bring you lots of joy, it sure does for us ;)
It has brought me joy for almost 9 years now and I wouldn't trade it for the world! :) Glad that you enjoy it too!
Love to hear more about the Git implementation. In using S3, are you going the walgit route or more like git-remote-s3?
How did you choose which countries to include on your map? You have countries that aren't in the EU but are missing countries which are.
Indeed, where the hell Cyprus is? Or you think it is too Russified to trust anymore? Perhaps you have a point.
Good luck, aspecialy in the UE!
(sorry I got excited and shared it)
"Everything" is in english. Are Ireland and Malta your primary markets?
And who exactly in European tech doesn't know English?
Eh, English is the closest thing to a Lingua Franca in Europe, if you want to get as broad as possible.
Especially for a got service, something what would will be eminently used by software developers, who mostly can speak English anyway.
Wenn du willst kann ich auch alles auf Deutsch schreiben aber dann versteht's keiner
Bitte. Sprechen Deutsch nein.
I could be worse, you could have written this in some of our north African languages, such as Greek or Italian.
Congratulations! I'm hooked. The AI slop block is what I like to learn more about. The FAQ does not include AI slop. Can you elaborate a bit on it please.
I just added a new FAQ item for that, but I'll copy it here as well:
We plan to reduce low-quality contributions through several features, some already in place and others still to come. Invite-only registration helps us discourage low-quality accounts and confirm that new members are real people. Next, we plan to introduce a vouching system, similar to Tangled's, that lets contributors build a reputation. We'll combine that reputation with other signals to assess new pull requests and issues. Contributions that appear low quality will be clearly marked and de-emphasized, while maintainers will make the final decision. We also plan to limit how many pull requests and issues a new contributor can open in repositories they don't own. This will be an ongoing effort, but the goal is simple: maintainers stay in control of their queues.
> We plan to reduce low-quality contributions
Ironic really because that was the original idea behind Git - to build a tree of trusted developers for the Linux kernel. Linus has those immediately below him that he trusts will push good quality code, and those folks do the same with their group of contributors.
> Invite-only registration helps us
If this is invite-only, then what you're doing is emulating the original strategy of Linus: only certain folks have commit rights. Extend that out to only certain folks have PR-creation rights and you're done. Maintainers select those that can contribute, these folks in-turn, select those that can contribute to the project, rinse and repeat.
Let everyone create issues and implicitly ignore these because any issue that doesn't make it passed the "acceptance level of a maintainer" will naturally be ignored and disappear. As is the case over at GH - issues naturally suffocate because no maintainer gives them air.
Perhaps have a special category "untrusted/toxic PRs" for contributors who don't belong in the tree of trust. These PRs are handled in a toxic-proof containment environment, i.e., they get particular vetting attentions by maintainers. Obviously this would be a path into the "tree of trust" for a project.
Then each project can also implicitly define what is "low quality" for their project - it's how they handle the "toxic PRs".
EDIT:
That's also why branching and forking is so cheap in Git: each sub-maintainer can maintain their own fork with it's branches before pushing up changes to the main fork. (Compare branching using RCS/CVS or Subversion to Git to get a feeling of "cheap" ;))
This can be done over at GH if a fork would be actively maintained by a sub-maintainer and every X days/weeks/months they would push the entire changes of the fork to the main repository. That would be closer to the Linux development strategy - as I understand it.
That's awesome. Thanks for working on this!
Thx for the info. Good luck with the project. There is most definitly a market for this, especially after the Codeberg activist takeover.
Thank you!
> Pushin doesn't track anything beyond the obvious: email, password hash, username, whatever information you put on your profile
This seems poorly worded or genuinely concerning. Why do you want to track my email, username or anything in my profile. What do you do with it? How do you track it?
"Track" means "store" here and we need to store it for authentication (email+password hash) and to show your public profile (e.g. https://pushin.eu/pjullrich). So, regular things, not tracking you for data mining stuff
Those two words are not synonymous. But anycase you should be adding a tos and privacy policy on your website.
If I want to create an account not to host repositories, but only to report bugs by opening issues in a repository of an application I'm using, do I still need an invitation code?
Its specifically based in France. This matters as EU law is less uniform than US law (yes, like differences between states, but a lot more so).
The UI is a lot snappier than Github.
The promise not to train models on the code is not very useful for public repos, and I cannot see anything about private repos.
Yes, we can't block models from scraping the public repos and train on them, but *we* won't use your code (neither public nor private) to train models on them. We really only want to host your code and do that well.
I think this maybe needs some more time, to figure out what the actual plan with this is - if any.
The humour is there: https://pushin.eu/orgs/mctestface/members (Boaty Mac Boat Face ref mentioned)
Yes, that's my test organization :)
Nice idea, zero trust signals. Don't even see company details or the folks behind and no legal pages.
Yes, sorry this escaped containment before I was able to update the landing page. Since the product is in invite-only beta still, I focused on the UX of the platform instead of the "marketing materials" aka. Landing page
Trust is not "marketing materials". Folks trust that you keep those promises, that their code ist safe. Your product is trust, not the application. Code and application are just the vehicle to deliver that.
I'm very much aware of that and I've put all my effort into making the application trustworthy first. That means: Not a single byte must ever get lost. Since the website wasn't updated for the general public when it hit HN, these trust signals (e.g. privacy policy, ToS, info on business model) are/were missing. Sorry about that!
So often when something launches, these are missing. And it always really surprises me. People apparently just sign up for such services, but I would want to know these details in advance before doing so.
This looks really nice! I'm interested in how the CI works though. One thing that annoys me about existing CI is that it's difficult to run locally and relatedly, config files don't work cross platform.
I'd love a CI platform that just used a super thin docker + script driver. Rather than platform specific YAML files that define steps.
https://codeberg.org/
also fits the description of "Git hosting that never leaves Europe".
Regardless of that, these don't seen to play for the same audience.
Codeberg Terms of Use[^0] makes it clear that it's only for "projects covered by a licence for free and open source software, free and open source hardware, or free cultural works", and "You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools". They also only provide private repos where the FOSS system need it for their infra or what not, and not just for any purpose.
These are totally fine for Codeberg to do, and it's wonderful for FOSS!!
However it is not a viable place for many projects that are on GitHub/GitLab now and would want to migrate, say: any commercial project, that would need "permission-free" private repos, or when the teams want to decided themselves how much generative AI their developers should use, not their Git-hosting provider...
So yeah, different ballpark.
[0]: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/org/src/branch/main/TermsOfUse...
Codeberg seems to focus on OSS whereas pushin seems to focus on enterprise/commercial uses?
Love it and will try to find a way to use it and pay for it.
That name though, does make me feel that somewhere in the stack is a tool called Gitler. Sorry!!
Thank you, but what? The name was meant like: `Push in (Europe)` hence, pushin.eu
I didn't get that either until I read this comment. I read "pushin" as one word, figured it was a made up proper name for a product.
Once upon a time, I, too, had a domain where the TLD was part of the actual name and required to read it correctly (think something like foobar-pl.us). In my experience this left most people confused and I abandoned that quite quickly.
I would want to know the pricing before I’d move anything there.
It should cost money - I just want to know how much.
It will!
I'll introduce subscriptions soon, we're currently still in invite-only beta, but the subscriptions will be very much like GitHub/GitLabs with individual and team pricing.
Try this git hosting, for a change: https://mikhailian.mova.org/posts/305-looking-for-a-european...
great idea, sadly full of vibe-code. I assume it was prompted by copying the style of some existing EU-style Design system.
Idea is promising though, hope it matures into something solid.
I feel author might not realize how much this will lead to its death and probably also current visitors that sees this (in its current state - aka design seen 1M times with virtually zero work on branding done) might never return.
You shouldn't allow repos without descriptions. Do people really cannot be bothered to write one sentence that describes the repo?
Why is it any of your business how I do or don't describe my repos? (Genuine question, it seems like a really weird demand to impose on other people for no particular reason)
I just moved from github to vodeberg then to my own self hosted forgejo on hetzner. I may wait awhile and then try yours.
I self-hosted Pushin on my own Forgejo instance on a Hetzner bare metal server before Pushin was ready and it was a great experience to be honest! Self-hosting Forgejo is great!
Smells vibe coded.
Congrats, great project. More info would be appreciated, I.E upload limit in GB for each and in total?
Thank you! Sorry about that, this post on HN caught me before it was ready. Upload limits are: 5GB for logs, 5GB for artifacts, 10 GB cache. These limits will probably change once I introduce a paid trier (same limits there, lower limits on the free tier)
I don't like vibe coding myself, but I love AI assisted development, my new bottleneck is no longer the search for syntax and features but my understanding. Am I welcome on your platform?
Yes.
>Bots are welcome. Slop gets blocked.
And yet the marketing copy is egregious AI slop.
There's a sign of life on the elexir forum: https://elixirforum.com/t/macro-mayhem-004-peter-announces-p...
There's a possibility this was made by a person. Apart from that good luck getting any information behind this.
That's true, that's me! My personal website is peterullrich.com
So you are switching focus from blockchain-something to EU-something?
Hm.
I was never really blockchain-something. It was all the hype when I finished my software engineering masters (around 2017/18), so to understand the technology better I started a Podcast and wrote my master thesis about it. I never used it or worked in it afterwards though and I never thought it'd become more than a scam unfortunately
There has to be a more thorough solution here. The current form of EU is betraying EU citizens to the USA - we already saw this and were astonished how Leyen insta-submitted to the orange clown. This can no longer be explained by "better business deals", since this is systematic. So, Europe depending on the USA is a lose-lose scenario for EU citizens, including the lack of nuclear arsenal on an EU-wide basis. We see this right now with Putin committing his genocide - he knows that agent Krasnov will never do anything against him. So these isolated strategies such as "xyz never leaving Europe" is fine as a first step, but it needs to be integrated into a cohesive overall strategy, including doing something about US mega-corporations that are extremely hostile to european interests - aka Google, Facebook and so forth. At the very least the EU should help fund open source alternatives much more in a systematic manner, from A to Z. Even that in and by itself is not an overarching strategy, but it is the first two steps towards one.
I wouldn't want to host software, or really any published work, in a legal regime that doesn't have something equivalent to the American first amendment.
I don't want to host in a country where a wannabe king breaks the law continously, who treats former allies like enemies etc etc
Which country do you recommend? Offshore on my own boat?
The radio caroline of git hosting
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12...
The first amendment only protects non US citizens if they are inside the US, even when entering the US the protection is less strong.
When in the US it does not protect you from getting deported based on what you said.
Non American protestors inside the US have faced consequences for their actions, in the past.
To a degree that is perfectly sensible: You would not want foreigners to oppose you from inside.
https://cis.org/Fishman/Sorry-Mahmoud-Khalil-Aliens-Do-Not-H...
Still, first amendment is of less importance to us outside the country.
Thinking that European countries don't have freedom of speech or press tells me all I have to know about you and where to put your comment
No country in the world has the right to absolute freedom of speech in their constitution/law other than the USA.
Ignoring this, Europe's 'freedom of speech' is pitiful.
And many people wouldn’t want to host in America because the first amendment doesn’t really protect you from the whims of the US government, which at the moment are pretty fucking random, and the US government gives itself rights to access any/everything hosted by US companies.