Replying to Avatar jb55

I wish people actually used it šŸ˜† I think I only ever got a patch from #[5]
Avatar
jb55 2y ago

This is what made me think it has to be insanely easy or no one will use it. Unfortunately that means gui tools ā˜ ļø

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
ben 2y ago

prefer composition - git cli and git gui coexist well (ive never touched the latter and many have never touched the former)

Avatar
jb55 2y ago

Yup this is why Iā€™m building both šŸ¤

Avatar
ben 2y ago

would love to help but rust hurts my brain šŸ˜µā€šŸ’«

12
Carlos 2y ago

Dunno, if someone is motivated enough to write a patch, they will spend a (one-time) 2-3 mins to figure out how to send the patch.

I don't think it has to necessarily be insanely easy.

Avatar
jack 2y ago

From a GitHub replacement perspective, Iā€™m hearing the following as most critical:

1. search (nostr is super weak here)

2. issue tracking (nostr ok through thread following)

3. social layer (nostr is great)

Avatar
rejon 2y ago

šŸ’Æ

5e
Satoshi Xakamoto 2y ago

Gm

Avatar
DanConwayDev 2y ago

What about verifying an authorised state when the list of maintainers evolves overtime?

Avatar
dieselbaby 2y ago

Something that might be viable (it'd take a lot of effort, though, and I'd have to look into what licenses the codebase was released under) would be forking/re-working some of the tech used on keybase.io; it has built-in git repos and could be modified to work with nostr IMO

Avatar
fiatjaf 2y ago

Aren't programmers used to doing git pull / git push? But I don't see why that patching scheme couldn't have a GUI counterpart.

Avatar
DanConwayDev 2y ago

the standard commands must be supported. Clone, pull and push could all be abstracted through a wrapper that receives and sends only patches over Nostr.