Now I see what you mean when you say the blossom big patch was better (but I still think the PR flow is nicer and the blossom big patch flow would have other problems not immediately obvious).

Maybe having a personal list of grasp servers, like we have for blossom servers, would help. Then you would know what are the default grasp servers for each user to use in these situations, then you just assume they will accept your stuff.

I wonder if we could have a different kind of announcement, with an expiration tag or something like that, that would allow grasp servers to delete the associated repositories after a while and also prevent these temporary forks from being associated too much with a specific user.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

We have that as a `10317` user grasp list, modelled on the blossom version was merged into NIP-34 as part of the PR event nip PR in commit 2aaba90839443dded18afb10adea5806904ea04f.

Also we have the 'personal-fork' tag in an announcement (see same commit) to differenciate these sort of announcements.

Why is https://nips.nostr.com/34 not reflective of the github version?

Good question, I was misled there I think. nostr:npub1txukm7xckhnxkwu450sm59vh2znwm45mewaps4awkef2tvsgh4vsf7phrl do you know?

Weird, I removed the cache for nips 34. It's now fixed.