It's not in place. The PR has been sidelined because it's not a git-focused implementation. 😒

Luigi only uses the git.

Well, we've developed a NIP for versioning notes, so the replacement note says which note it's replacing, so you could still trace back to a previous state by pulling the previous version of that note back up and using it as a replacement for your replacement.

Then the chain would have layers at places where it was altered.

Git has this, with git replace. You always see the replacement commit, not the original.

I don't use f-droid so I'm not sure what's there.

It doesn't have to be an immutable blockchain, just a coherent one. Is that possible?

It would be rather easy to test the interoperability, if you had an agreed-upon test suite. Then they could just use any list that passed the test.

Test-driven configuration management. TDCM

I'm thinking it should lean more toward configuration management and less toward strict source control.

Creating linked-lists of files (notes could be used for this) that are interoperable. The trust is created by the npub signing the list and his WoT would immediately see when he published a new list.

Or something like that. Something like composer does, for environments.

This would mean that someone else could publish a different list without having to ask the first person for permission, because they're not overwriting anything. They're just publishing their own configuration lists and signing it with their own npub.

And people could coordinate interoperability by agreeing on a range of compatible config lists that don't create conflicts within their use cases.

As one idea, if you force me to make one in 5 minutes. 🤣

I'm a dunce at operating systems, I'm afraid.

I just see it getting increasingly bloated and it's turning into a big ball of mud.

And git is just so sticky because programmers all learn git as soon as they start programming and their brains get rewired that way. They literally become incapable of designing an alternative.

But maybe someone uncorrupted will eventually come up with something better.

Yeah, but most are tiny and would get wider usage, if they lowered the barrier to change.

Linux and Git probably need to be replaced, eventually.

This is what you have when you try to control a vaguely-defined open protocol. You keep sensible, useful changes out, and stifle innovative, but you still have implementation chaos.

A monopoly on a chaotic system.

LOL

You would have collections of notes. You wouldn't have to hold all versions of all files.

But I was thinking more of something like the Nostr Protocol repo. That's code that doesn't even need to compile. It's just a spec.

Write the protocol for notes in notes.

You just need a different type of wiki.

A note wiki.

Valid point that "good" is relative. Like genres of music, everyone has different overlapping tastes. Depends on the diversity of the user base I suppose, and some genres are inherently more niche than others. I'd say an IMEI editor code list is fairly niche 😁 When I say "good content" above, I'm referring less to a specific genre of content, and more to the quality and dedication of the creators. There is a fair amount of chitter chatter on Nostr, and that's fun to a point if you get along with those people, but there simply isn't a lot else for anyone else to want to come here for, and there is little incentive to come here to create it. Zaps are relevant because they provide incentive. They also present a challenge, just as you pointed out, because bitcoin itself has a small user base within the context of social media users.

Yes, I think this is not unusual.

I've seen the same behavior on OS repos and corporate bug boards.

Gatekeeping behavior.

Otherwise, all code would be in wikis.

Nostr feels like it's in a catch 22 right now. Nostr needs good content, but creating good content needs incentive. Will nostr have a "gradually then suddenly" moment, where all of a sudden it's the place to be and there's this massive influx of users and content? Or will it be slow and steady growth? Or will it simply remain niche among the techie crowd that likes to tinker (the "Linux of social media" as I saw someone aptly describe it yesterday)? Incentives like zaps can scale with enough users. But putting in the massive amount of time needed to build a reputation and repertoire of material is exhausting if there's no eventual growth and return in sight. Unless you're simply doing it out of boredom or have nothing better to do with your time, I guess. We can only say "we are early" for so long before we will have to accept that it's too late for Nostr if it continues at the rate it's going.

I was employed as a software tester once and a woman who didn't like me sat on the bug board and everything I submitted was immediately closed at the next meeting as "not reproduceable". Within a couple of weeks a customer would inevitably find and report it and it'd get immediately corrected.

One of the developers thought I was being paranoid and sat down to have me write up a report of a bug he'd found and when it was closed, he threw a fit, but she just kept doing it until I willingly changed departments.