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.
You seem to cite tangled a lot, and logically, I am wondering if you have any plan to also federalize on top of the AT protocol, so accounts could interact across the site boundary and also allow self hosting but still benefiting from pushin network? It may be hard in terms of design so I understand if you say you won't.
Yes! I’d love to provide private or at least personal firehoses to users maybe based on the same lexicons as Tangled uses so that you can sync your Pushin repo to your own Tangled knot. That’d be cool, no? Also, sign-in with your atmosphere account, and generally offering lexicon-based API output to make it easy to sync to Tangled or somewhere else
It's closer to walgit as it stores the packs in S3, but it uses Postgres for locking a repo during a push instead of using the Cursor/Walgit trick of using a WAL+CAS in S3. I've evaluated CAS on the Scaleway S3 service, but writing the WAL adds 240ms to every push, a cost we don't have with Postgres where it's a fast row lock. I also evaluated whether keeping a WAL would be useful, but ultimately decided against it because we can track everything the WAL tracks through the git history + audit logs without the write cost overhead.
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
- Registrar: HOSTINGER operations, UAB, Lithuania. Hostinger-branded authoritative DNS servers run on Cloudflare’s network. This creates a dependency on a US company.
- IPv6 is not supported by the public website/Git endpoint.
- DNSSEC would be a great addition for security, especially due to the use of US-based Cloudflare and Let's Encrypt.
Feels like 2026 is the best time for non-US tech companies to grow. What a weird timeline we're in. Excited for our developments up here in Canada too :D
Ooh, here come the others. I'm sure there's more people working on this same thing. Probably mostly a matter of how ready we are to release something. Nice to see it coming out of the Netherlands though.
I think the hardest part about working on the same thing is to not immediately post it when you see other products in the same space pop up.
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.
> we can't block models from scraping the public repos
FYI, there is the nuke option, which is generating endless nonsense pages as a form of “bot sink” [1] that ends the scraping relatively quickly, but IIRC that also tanks your search rankings, since it likely affects benign crawlers too – not something you’d necessarily want to happen to a new domain, unless you really need to protect server resources against aggressive hostile crawlers like SourceHut and so many others had to combat.
> LLMs cannot “crawl pages” or “scrape” or do anything - it’s an offline archive with a few convenience methods.
Being a bit needlessly pedantic here. I think it's well understood in these circles that such models are being driven by agents, which absolutely can crawl and scrape. The only thing a human needs to do is write rules for the agent to follow.
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.
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...
That’s right. There are plenty of good options for OSS but few to none focused on both, public and private especially with team/enterprise support. That’s why I created Pushin :) simply to have a place to store both my public and private repos but still retain a community which you dont get on a self-hosted solution
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 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!
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?
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 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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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)
*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!
Disclaimer: I am building https://juju.bi, therefore you don't need to answer if uncomfortable.
Can you clarify, here and on the website, whether the data remains:
* in _EU member state_ sovereign territory
* in _European states'_ sovereign territory
* on the contentinent of Europe
or some combination of the above?
I am specifically wondering about:
* Out-of-Europe territories of European states.
* UK, Norway, Russia, Switzerland, Serbia etc.
> Where is my code actually hosted?
> On bare-metal servers that we operate in Scaleway's Paris datacenters
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.
Is there an EU law about a "dog tax" when you've mentioned the dog? Perhaps there should be.
Ps - I'm kidding. Mostly. I like dogs and cats. Frequently, more than people.
- and I agree!
Especially for a git service, something what would will be eminently used by software developers, who mostly can speak English anyway.
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?
The word you are looking for is “collect”.
Saying you “track” implies you’re putting together a profile to be consumed in other services
- Registrar: HOSTINGER operations, UAB, Lithuania. Hostinger-branded authoritative DNS servers run on Cloudflare’s network. This creates a dependency on a US company.
- IPv6 is not supported by the public website/Git endpoint.
- DNSSEC would be a great addition for security, especially due to the use of US-based Cloudflare and Let's Encrypt.
I hope all the best to succeed with this project, I'm sold!
I think the hardest part about working on the same thing is to not immediately post it when you see other products in the same space pop up.
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.
FYI, there is the nuke option, which is generating endless nonsense pages as a form of “bot sink” [1] that ends the scraping relatively quickly, but IIRC that also tanks your search rankings, since it likely affects benign crawlers too – not something you’d necessarily want to happen to a new domain, unless you really need to protect server resources against aggressive hostile crawlers like SourceHut and so many others had to combat.
[1] https://www.toxsec.com/p/ai-tar-pits-are-drowning-llm-scrape...
A developer would be the one using the LLM to evaluate page response text and scraping what they need.
LLMs cannot “crawl pages” or “scrape” or do anything - it’s an offline archive with a few convenience methods.
Being a bit needlessly pedantic here. I think it's well understood in these circles that such models are being driven by agents, which absolutely can crawl and scrape. The only thing a human needs to do is write rules for the agent to follow.
also fits the description of "Git hosting that never leaves Europe".
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...
They are strongly ideology-focused and it’s a matter of time they ban something you want to upload.
The humour is there: https://pushin.eu/orgs/mctestface/members (Boaty Mac Boat Face ref mentioned)
That name though, does make me feel that somewhere in the stack is a tool called Gitler. Sorry!!
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.
It should cost money - I just want to know how much.
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.
And yet the marketing copy is egregious AI slop.
Idea is promising though, hope it matures into something solid.
I'd love a CI platform that just used a super thin docker + script driver. Rather than platform specific YAML files that define steps.
There's a possibility this was made by a person. Apart from that good luck getting any information behind this.
Hm.
Which country do you recommend? Offshore on my own boat?
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.
Ignoring this, Europe's 'freedom of speech' is pitiful.