Gitea is commercial now though. historically speaking, it's likely just a question of time until they switch to a more restrictive licence to extract more money.
They also added their own CI system the other day. Haven't tried it myself, but I don't think drone-ci is necessary anymore.
IMO Gitea is fairly protected against a 'random' relicensing, as the project does not use a contributor licensing agreement.
While license and quality shenanigans can still happen, say if their technical oversight committee went bad, they cant do the same sort of rugpull done by projects that made contributors give all ownership interest to a single party.
GOGS (gitea's origin project) is still around and keeps moving at its own pace, as well.
Writing from a Arch system I installed on 2017-12-04 and use as my daily driver, I've been moving the hard drive from laptop to laptop over time and the system from drive to drive when upgrading. Prior to that, I had been using Gentoo for years which is also great.
Static typing removes freedom I am addicted to with duck typing, however, I only ship TDD code which also serve as coding documentation. Both are protective but if you're not writing tests then by all means use static typing.
I'm finding this hard to relate to. Our circumstances and experiences must be pretty different. But I'm afraid to me that sentence reads a bit like "I have a lathe so I don't need a bicycle". You or I might not do bicycle jobs, or lathe jobs, but it's a bit of a stretch to imply one renders the other irrelevant.
I find it interesting that you characterise static typing as about safety. I think it's more about communication. (for me this includes "communication to myself when I wrote this seven years ago and didn't think about it since", which I appreciate may be a bit of an edge case). Tests are also a great medium of communication, but a different one - in which case the metaphor becomes swap a sonnet for a sonata? I'd like both please, but maybe not always at the same time :-D
Duck typing (structural typing) is orthogonal to dynamic vs static. Typescript being an example of a statically typed language whose type system is centers on structural typing
> if you're not writing tests then by all means use static typing
I know you're not saying this, but your wording implies it to a bit... Tests to cover <the things covered by static typing> are only one of the uses for automated testing. There's plenty of places (most of them) where automated testing is just as useful with a statically typed language.
