6 ms·
Ask HN: To git or not to git
Hello world.
I'm at kind of a crossroads: I want to make a site that will feature a web based editor for text files in some markup languages aimed for non-developer users, but I want to offer them the ability to track changes to those files and maybe even "fork" and "merge" other documents/document-clusters; again, all via a web interface. Basically, you could say that it's like a web-based github for non-devs.
I could use a key-value store like couchdb or cassandra to store diffs between times when something is saved to show histories and do merges with one of the strategies git uses; and maybe in the future let users use a desktop app and thus clone/push/pull changes like a regular git hosting site. Again, in a skimmed non-dev approach to git.
For the record, this talk has practically convinced me of using git http://www.techscreencast.com/language/ruby/using-git-in-ruby-applications---scott-chacon-/1431 because I realize that it might seem overkill at first but I don't want to end up reinventing git. But a little n00b voice in my head still screams overkill.
So, hackerworld, what's your take on this? I mean, I could just do something with the [ruby](http://github.com/mojombo/grit)/(python)[http://gitorious.org/git-python] interfaces to git and something like gitosis, or create my own subset of file history management like said above; what would be the wisest choice?
- patio11 16y agosome markup language aimed for non-technical users Stop here, test assumptions before proceeding.
- DeusExMachina 16y agoAgree with patio11, it's a pretty strong assumption to think non technical users will use some sort of markup language. Why make the markup language visible to users? I think that you should hide it behind a user friendly WYSIWYG interface, like google docs (bold, italic, lists, etc.). You can then use git or git-like processes behind the scenes and reprocess the result not to show markup to the user. I think that markup for non tech users is a bad experience and diffs with markup in them are even worse.
- zimpenfish 16y ago"it's a pretty strong assumption to think non technical users will use some sort of markup language" Yeah! Well, except all those who use some variety of bulletin board/forum with the random markup they entail. Probably not more than a couple hundred million of those people though.
- DeusExMachina 16y agoOne thing is having markup in a place where usually you don't write more than a few lines, another is having it in a big document. One thing is having it a free forum, another is having it in a product you pay for. One thing is having to use it, another is to actually like it. And, as far as my experience goes, most of the posts in forums and the like are plain text. Not to mention that a lot of these forums are targeted at already somewhat technical people. EDIT: And, on a personal note, markup even annoys me, even if I'm a developer.
- lfborjas 16y agoI think I made a mistake in my statement: it's not some random markup like textile or markdown, but the idea is more akin to a LaTeX-y interface, a WYSIWYM web-based editor. You have a good point, however, 'cause, coming to think of it, I wouldn't be targeting very non-tech people after all and they might very well expect stuff that's already done in git.
- lfborjas 16y agoYou're right, it is a pretty strong assumption and I agree with providing a WYSIWYG interface, even though the language in question is WYSIWYM-oriented, I think the editor could be a sort of what lyx is to LaTeX.
- wglb 16y agoI agree with you. However, as a counterexample to the typical user, my Mother has long been a WP fanatic, and loves Reveal Codes (which she picked up pretty much on her own) and decries the modern GUI interface. There are always exceptions.