5 ms·

The first project provided by DDG to me was Radicle[https://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/]

soulofmischief 7y ago
rad project allows you to create, checkout, manage, and publish a project, comprised of issues, patch proposals, and a git repo. Well hot dog. And it uses LISP for scripting? Nice. Interesting approach to saving state, too.: One only needs the address of the latest input, the "head", to be able to recover the whole log. The owner of a machine uses an IPNS link to point to the head of the list, and the name of this link is then the name of the machine also. Thanks for sharing that. Definitely going to give it a whirl this weekend.
- toyg 7y ago
  It looks the business but it lacks the single most important feature for popularity: a GUI. GitHub made Git dominant by building a friendly GUI on top of it. Before, it was just another player in a relatively crowded field of CLI DVCSs. Obviously it is not essential to get stuff done, but anything with any ambition of generating network effects definitely needs a GUI. The other thing that seems to be lacking, from a quick reading of the docs, is a way to generate pull requests (or "patches" in Rad terms) from a branch, and then merge them on another branch. Obviously you can do it manually in git, but GH is definitely a superior experience.
  - soulofmischief 7y ago
    > It looks the business but it lacks the single most important feature for popularity: a GUI. It's a matter of perspective. My first thought when reading the docs was, "All someone needs to do is slap a GUI on this baby. Good thing the designers made a simple CLI that it could interface with." They've already done most of the heavy lifting. At this point a GUI is trivial to add. "Terminal–first" doesn't imply "terminal-only". In fact, quite the opposite. I wouldn't be so quick to assume that they don't envision a GUI at some point-- Why not contribute to the project and get the ball rolling? The patch command [0] has a propose subcommand that describes what you're talking about. It generates a patch from a commit (on any branch, I presume). This can be applied however you see fit. And the checkout subcommand even lets you generate branches from patches similar to GH. What seems to be missing? [0] https://radicle.xyz/docs/#rad-cli-reference https://radicle.xyz/docs/#rad-cli-reference
    - toyg 7y ago
      I agree that the GUI situation is a glass-half-full sort of thing, I'm just saying it needs that as a priority if they want any network effect. > The patch command [0] has a propose subcommand that describes what you're talking about. Yeah but in the tutorial it says it will fail to work if you are on a different branch from master - I took it to mean that the patch command can only target the same branch it was generated on. If that's the case, obviously the maintainer can then do the manual merge-and-delete routine; I'm just saying that on github it's a one-click operation.
      - soulofmischief 7y ago
        Hmm okay, I guess I'll just have to play around with it and see.

rad project allows you to create, checkout, manage, and publish a project, comprised of issues, patch proposals, and a git repo. Well hot dog. And it uses LISP for scripting? Nice. Interesting approach to saving state, too.: One only needs the address of the latest input, the "head", to be able to recover the whole log. The owner of a machine uses an IPNS link to point to the head of the list, and the name of this link is then the name of the machine also. Thanks for sharing that. Definitely going to give it a whirl this weekend.

toyg 7y ago
It looks the business but it lacks the single most important feature for popularity: a GUI. GitHub made Git dominant by building a friendly GUI on top of it. Before, it was just another player in a relatively crowded field of CLI DVCSs. Obviously it is not essential to get stuff done, but anything with any ambition of generating network effects definitely needs a GUI. The other thing that seems to be lacking, from a quick reading of the docs, is a way to generate pull requests (or "patches" in Rad terms) from a branch, and then merge them on another branch. Obviously you can do it manually in git, but GH is definitely a superior experience.
- soulofmischief 7y ago
  > It looks the business but it lacks the single most important feature for popularity: a GUI. It's a matter of perspective. My first thought when reading the docs was, "All someone needs to do is slap a GUI on this baby. Good thing the designers made a simple CLI that it could interface with." They've already done most of the heavy lifting. At this point a GUI is trivial to add. "Terminal–first" doesn't imply "terminal-only". In fact, quite the opposite. I wouldn't be so quick to assume that they don't envision a GUI at some point-- Why not contribute to the project and get the ball rolling? The patch command [0] has a propose subcommand that describes what you're talking about. It generates a patch from a commit (on any branch, I presume). This can be applied however you see fit. And the checkout subcommand even lets you generate branches from patches similar to GH. What seems to be missing? [0] https://radicle.xyz/docs/#rad-cli-reference https://radicle.xyz/docs/#rad-cli-reference
  - toyg 7y ago
    I agree that the GUI situation is a glass-half-full sort of thing, I'm just saying it needs that as a priority if they want any network effect. > The patch command [0] has a propose subcommand that describes what you're talking about. Yeah but in the tutorial it says it will fail to work if you are on a different branch from master - I took it to mean that the patch command can only target the same branch it was generated on. If that's the case, obviously the maintainer can then do the manual merge-and-delete routine; I'm just saying that on github it's a one-click operation.
    - soulofmischief 7y ago
      Hmm okay, I guess I'll just have to play around with it and see.