Avatar
hazeycode
bfbd26dc75540c5ee8be08f0ffaf2191a90c63e37ce066412d25ccfa5104e730

#[0]​ #subscribe

@nossence #subscribe

Like when they are as tall as the scroll view and scrolling haha 🤢

To answer the first question more directly: Social consensus is adequate for deciding whether to merge a PR whether that happens over Nostr or elsewhere.

I’m thinking that a chain of commits signed by authors may only be merged into the “mainline” by maintainers, the merge commit will be signed by one (or more ?) maintainers. A list of maintainers and the repo/fork’s URI can be written into the git tree such that anyone can verify the repo state without looking at any nostr event.

To find the top commit, you verify the repo state communicated by the relay that you have decided to trust or that you are running.

What do you think? What am I missing?

Good overview nostr:note10n205weqjveqmarhua4ewx58xurmv3majp3rlqjvjl5ldkm54mvq8f32h5

Yeah I keep seeing things trying to use chains of Nostr events as distributed consensus. But what’s the point? Git already does that very well. I am trying to write up a proposal based on this presupposition.

First person to integrate Nostr and Simplex gets to set NIP-04 on fire 🔥 nostr:note1g5l7s2433554veddkajkqsg629e0nfpl64vjzeht8uj542lwdvhqdgcx78