Replying to Avatar DanConwayDev

sending patches via nostr to maintainers who havn't created a repo event sounds reasonable.

creating a repo event for a repository that you do not claim to be a maintainer of is problematic.

publishing a repo event is an indication that you want to recieve patches and issues via nostr.

a repo event's reputation is built up when npubs with a good WoT score tag it in patches, issues and replies.

a scammer / spammer could create events for loads of repositories just to create confusion and make it difficult to know which reposistories are actually interested in receiving patches / issues via nostr.
Avatar
Laeserin 1y ago

"publishing a repo event is an indication that you want to recieve patches and issues via nostr."

Yes, and this isn't going to be something only the original repo owners want to do. A group of developers can agree to work together right past the original repo, as if they had a fork in GitHub. Totally legit.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
DanConwayDev 1y ago

I agree. there are 2 totally legit and important use case here:

1. they want to maintain an alternative authoritative codebase commit tip (traditional fork)

2. they want to discuss and share patches without repo owners involvement or without the desire to share an agreed upon code fork

how do we enable this without enabling a npub to create a repository masquerading as a popular other repository? we haven't had anything like that yet but it is somewhat enviable.

maybe encouraging making it clear in the name / description and a reporting mechanism like nip56?

Avatar
Laeserin 1y ago

Yeah, I think reporting and WoT is enough.