Selfhosted

Funkwhale is OK, use it here but served via Yunohost cos I is lazy

I have been on this search myself a few months now and JUST stumbled upon something that fits the bill.

Like, i literally just found it and haven't played with it or investigated too much, but it fits your requirements.

raphson music server is hosted on codeberg now! they left github last year.

it has a great looking interface, integrates with HA, uses subsonic API.

I am greatly interested in learning more about this.!!

https://codeberg.org/raphson/music-server

Clarifying, your looking for a new music streaming service that has a code base not hosted in GitHub? Otherwise it sounds like you are somehow hosting your music in GitHub.

I don’t think you’ll be able to find a project that doesn’t contain some code (like dependencies) hosted on GitHub.

I understand not wanting to use GitHub yourself, but not wanting to use a self-hosted software that is distributed through GitHub is kind of extreme.

As an open source software developer, this is a weird hill to die on, and I use and donate to Codeberg every month. I don't give GitHub one penny and I don't support anything about GitHub's AI shit, but I do not mind them eating my costs or other peoples costs for me or them one bit. I'm not at all against having my open source code subsidized by wealthier people.

Sure, go ahead and say "if you're poor and need github's free services I won't use your software" but it's just weird. Codeberg is not a for-profit corporation, it is wrong to demand them to provide free services. It is not wrong to use to the maximum extent GitHub's free services, imo, so long as you aren't giving them money. Bleed em while they let you and all that jazz. It absolutely does cost them, but they don't care so why should the less fortunate?

There is absolutely no way you can avoid GH hosted project completely. It's like trying to buy a phone without Chinese parts.

I don't see a reason to avoid using software hosted on GH. I moved off GH when MS bought it, and all that entailed was no longer hosting my own software on GH, and using alternative FOSS git forges. That still has a similar effect, and when a critical mass of devs move off GH, the rest will follow suit. The main draw of GH is that everything's on there; when that's no longer true, it will no longer be the main git forge. Especially once Forgejo adds ActivityPub integration; I imagine that'll speed the process along a lot.

A lone user boycotting all software hosted on GH is realistically not going to make any devs move their projects off GH. You may say that it doesn't have to be a lone user, but I think you'll be hard pressed to get a whole movement of people refusing to use any software hosted on GH.

I also think the boundaries of your boycott are just too ambiguous. What if you download the software from somewhere other than GH, and it just has a GH repo? Is that ok with you? Is it that you just don't want to touch MS's servers? What about software where the GH repo is just a read-only mirror, and the main collaboration/development happens elsewhere, like a GitLab or Forgejo instance? I would rather struggle to see an argument for refusing to use software in either of those cases.

Not suggesting an app but I think what you plan to do as an effort to boycott GitHub is the most non-productive thing to do...

What if it is a project like OpenBSD, which the active repo is still CVS, but has a read-only GitHub repo for public consumption? I believe a fair amount of open source developers rely partly or even totally on donation, and the popularity of a platform has direct impact to their life support. What you are going to do is the easiest as a totally unrelated onlooker - you deem them to be immoral because they host or mirror the project on GitHub, you judged just like how people do on social media when they hear some company doing evil things, spent probably just a few minutes to write a post and created direct impact.

There are many more better things to do. You know why they are forced to host on GitHub so why don't you set up a fund that supports developers to not host on GitHub, or as a maintainer who helps projects to mirror on GitHub alternatives and eventually swtich the active repo to the alternatives?

I have great respect to open source developers who bring us a better world. Please think again what is the difference between what you are going to do vs people who ignore all the heavylifting of open source developers did and say "add this feature in the next hour or I will stop using your software, because I think it is the most important thing to do"...

... Have you reached out to the devs/maintainers of the projects to find out what their plans are going forward?

Because you may be completely dismissing projects that are in the process (whether its early planning or otherwise) of moving to codeberg or something.

Or even expressed any of your concerns to the devs?

Jellyfin
Why does it matter that they are hosted on GitHub though?

I don't have any app suggestions for you but have been reading through the comments and just wanted to say that I'm 100% with you.

I have a similar conversation with other musicians I know and it's the reason that I (and many others) won't release anything on Spotify: Just being there adds value to them and what they do is destructive and dirty.

I hope you find something and keep standing up for what's right!

I'm going to migrate my own code to Codeberg.org soon. Its open source, and hosted outside the U.S., so checks all the non-corporo boxes i want. Maybe check that out?

Are you wanting something that you don't have to download from GitHub yourself (so a project that hosts a docker container somewhere and just code is in GitHub is OK), or are you looking to boycott any project that is not boycotting GitHub and so any part of that project should not use GitHub for any code at all in which case possibly even dependencies should not be on GitHub even if they publish their distributions elsewhere? Or somewhere in between?

If you want to go pre-connect, the library usually loans out music. Mostly CD's though, so you'd need a player.

I use Navidrome and highly recommend it. Nice Canadian developer.

I also use GitLab.

One option is for you to mirror Navidrome on GitLab. I will happily use your mirror instead of GitHub.

Another option is to reach out to the Navidrome dev and propose moving to GitLab. If you open an issue to that effect, I would add a comment with my support.

I found this: https://codeberg.org/mysearchhistory123/lms

LMS - Lightweight Music Server

LMS is a self-hosted music streaming software: access your music collection from anywhere using a web interface!

I also found this: https://codeberg.org/thororen/Feishin

Feishin

Rewrite of Sonixd.

Features:

• MPV player backend
• Web player backend
• Modern UI
• Scrobble playback to your server
• Smart playlist editor (Navidrome)
• Synchronized and unsynchronized lyrics support

Some elements of these are on github and I can't attest to either. Neither has recent updates, but should function. Web interfaces and API support should mean that you have some mobile options. Like others, I object to your reasoning, but this is a community to help one another, so your reasoning for your goals doesn't really matter to me.

I don't think that you are likely to find any software that meets all of your requirements, but I hope this helps.

Funkwhale has/had support for federation. I wonder how that would work and exactly what is federated.

Too late for me to look up the answers so I'm hoping someone else can do my homework while I'm sleeping.

https://az.id.au/ops/funkwhale-configuration-and-first-impressions/

I believe, Icecast ticks at least some of your criteria. It's been around since forever, so it's probably the most stable option and even a Pi1 is likely overkill for it. No idea how it holds up in terms of UI, app and Docker, though.

They do have a mirror on GitHub, but the main repo is on a self-hosted GitLab.