Let’s let those alternatives flourish :-)

> While there are definitely valid use cases for Actions, I suspect they are fewer and further between than we've led ourselves to believe.

I use Actions to run automated tests and build documentation previews for my open source projects, which I think are very common use cases. I think this could be one of the largest obstacles to a lot of open source projects moving off GitHub, which when ignored like this reduces the credibility of a "How to Ditch GitHub" article. Don't misunderstand - I'm not saying that moving off GitHub can't or shouldn't be done even in these cases, but there's going to be some friction that deters people.

The point about static sites is pretty valid, but I'd point out that the method the article describes is just obfuscated FTP. Unless you really want the domain provided by Codeberg, wouldn't it be better to use a simpler free web host (not a software forge) and just upload your built site onto it?

I think the Actions support being so lacking is a deal breaker for us. I know we can bring our own. But I really don't want to manage infra here and take on that responsibility.

Unless GitHub knowningly trains on code in private repositories (not that I am aware of), it does not matter where you host your code, or whether it's GPL or MIT licensed. Someone is training their models using your code. That's just a matter of life.