Compare

Codeberg vs SourceHut

Codeberg scores higher on the AgentReady, 55/100 against 29/100. They differ on 15 of the 41 signals. Which ones decides whether an agent can adopt them without a person watching.

What each one is

Codeberg. Codeberg is a non-profit Git hosting platform maintained by Codeberg e.V., based in Berlin, Germany.

SourceHut. the hacker's forge

Where Codeberg is ahead

Codeberg passes search discoverable, clear product positioning, public docs discoverable and mcp discoverable, and SourceHut does not. That is discover, whether an agent can find the product at all without being told it exists.

It also holds understand: pricing understandable. SourceHut misses it.

And on adopt, self-service signup, agent-compatible signup flow, free trial or free allowance, fast time to first request, copyable quickstart and mcp integration available. SourceHut misses those.

Finally, on operate, agent compatibility verified. SourceHut misses it.

Where SourceHut is ahead

SourceHut passes official typescript sdk and official python sdk, and Codeberg does not. That is adopt, whether an agent can get a key and make its first successful call without a human in the loop.

It also holds operate: structured, predictable output. Codeberg misses it.

What neither does

Both fail clear canonical domain, llms.txt published, llms-full.txt / full agent docs, machine-readable metadata, structured api reference, openapi / spec quality, request examples provided, response examples provided, errors and status codes documented, limits / constraints documented, no mandatory sales call, programmatic credential creation, machine-readable errors, retry behavior documented, idempotency support, rate-limit behavior predictable. If your agent needs any of those, you will be building it yourself either way.

Score, pillar by pillar

The AgentReady splits into four pillars, scored separately, because a product can be easy to find and still impossible to adopt.

Discover is whether an agent can find the product at all without being told it exists. Codeberg leads 73 to 20. Codeberg misses clear canonical domain, llms.txt published, llms-full.txt / full agent docs, machine-readable metadata; SourceHut misses search discoverable, clear canonical domain, clear product positioning, public docs discoverable, llms.txt published, llms-full.txt / full agent docs, mcp discoverable, machine-readable metadata.

Understand. Codeberg leads 31 to 23. Codeberg misses structured api reference, openapi / spec quality, request examples provided, response examples provided, errors and status codes documented, limits / constraints documented; SourceHut misses structured api reference, openapi / spec quality, pricing understandable, request examples provided, response examples provided, errors and status codes documented, limits / constraints documented.

Adopt. Codeberg leads 62 to 25. Codeberg misses no mandatory sales call, programmatic credential creation, official typescript sdk, official python sdk; SourceHut misses self-service signup, no mandatory sales call, agent-compatible signup flow, programmatic credential creation, free trial or free allowance, fast time to first request, copyable quickstart, mcp integration available.

Operate. Codeberg leads 53 to 47. Codeberg misses structured, predictable output, machine-readable errors, retry behavior documented, idempotency support, rate-limit behavior predictable; SourceHut misses machine-readable errors, retry behavior documented, idempotency support, rate-limit behavior predictable, agent compatibility verified.

Pricing

Codeberg does not publish a machine-readable starting price and has a free tier. SourceHut does not publish one.

Signal by signal

Which to pick

Codeberg clears more of the signals an agent needs, so it is the safer default for unattended use. Full profiles: Codeberg and SourceHut. Alternatives to each: Codeberg, SourceHut.

An agent can fetch this as data: POST /v1/compare {"slugs": ["codeberg", "sr"]}