4 ms·

For starters, it's not owned by a gigagroup

MaxBarraclough 6y ago
Perhaps a relevant comparison here is Pinboard. It's a paid subscription website and has done very well as a one-man-army project. Its success hasn't compromised its virtues of being lightweight and no-nonsense (unlike Delicious). If SourceHut could do the same for Git that would be great.
- enriquto 6y ago
  > If SourceHut could do the same for Git that would be great. It already does. Other than some (minor) missing features that are in active development, what else do you need?
  - MaxBarraclough 6y ago
    It's a 'public alpha'. Personally I won't be signing up until it's describing itself as stable.
    - hoistbypetard 6y ago
      Their description of "alpha" is more stable than many services that describe themselves as stable, IMO: https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/ https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/
    - enriquto 6y ago
      You can sign-in for free while it is alpha and try it. Everything works very well except the account data export that is not still enabled. I have found it very practical and fast, much better than the typical github+travis combination.
Carpetsmoker 6y ago
Instead it's owned by an abrasive difficult to deal with developer who will argue "you're just doing it wrong" with paying customers. Clearly things aren't exactly roses and sunshine here either.
- gspr 6y ago
  Example?
  - Carpetsmoker 6y ago
    e.g. https://lobste.rs/s/j1gl4t/sourcehut_prohibits_repos_with_large https://lobste.rs/s/j1gl4t/sourcehut_prohibits_repos_with_la... Both the original story as well as the comments regarding Andrew's usage for Zig.
    - gspr 6y ago
      That doesn't sound abrasive at all to me. It's just a normal technical disagreement. What am I missing?
      - hoistbypetard 6y ago
        It doesn't (and didn't at the time) sound abrasive to me, either.
      - Carpetsmoker 6y ago
        You don't think it's strange for a service provider to tell people that "mercurial isn't suitable for this" (even though it clearly works, and has been working for many years) and "you're writing your program wrong"? It's fine to not support certain use cases because it's too much effort or otherwise too expensive. It's not fine to, as a service provider, tell people that their programs are (and I quote) "wrong". If you're okay with that then that's your choice, but for me it really turned me off sourcehut.
        gspr 6y ago
        > You don't think it's strange for a service provider to tell people that "mercurial isn't suitable for this" (even though it clearly works, and has been working for many years) and "you're writing your program wrong"? No, not really, if done politely. Which seems to be the case here. It also might "work" to use a large crystal vase as a hammer, but it's still "doing it wrong". If anything, I'd fault sr.ht for having too vague usage policies and then telling users they are in violation of said policies. That's not good. But they are in alpha, so hopefully it's something that'll improve.

Perhaps a relevant comparison here is Pinboard. It's a paid subscription website and has done very well as a one-man-army project. Its success hasn't compromised its virtues of being lightweight and no-nonsense (unlike Delicious). If SourceHut could do the same for Git that would be great.

enriquto 6y ago
> If SourceHut could do the same for Git that would be great. It already does. Other than some (minor) missing features that are in active development, what else do you need?
- MaxBarraclough 6y ago
  It's a 'public alpha'. Personally I won't be signing up until it's describing itself as stable.
  - hoistbypetard 6y ago
    Their description of "alpha" is more stable than many services that describe themselves as stable, IMO: https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/ https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/
  - enriquto 6y ago
    You can sign-in for free while it is alpha and try it. Everything works very well except the account data export that is not still enabled. I have found it very practical and fast, much better than the typical github+travis combination.

Carpetsmoker 6y ago

Instead it's owned by an abrasive difficult to deal with developer who will argue "you're just doing it wrong" with paying customers. Clearly things aren't exactly roses and sunshine here either.

gspr 6y ago
Example?
- Carpetsmoker 6y ago
  e.g. https://lobste.rs/s/j1gl4t/sourcehut_prohibits_repos_with_large https://lobste.rs/s/j1gl4t/sourcehut_prohibits_repos_with_la... Both the original story as well as the comments regarding Andrew's usage for Zig.
  - gspr 6y ago
    That doesn't sound abrasive at all to me. It's just a normal technical disagreement. What am I missing?
    - hoistbypetard 6y ago
      It doesn't (and didn't at the time) sound abrasive to me, either.
    - Carpetsmoker 6y ago
      You don't think it's strange for a service provider to tell people that "mercurial isn't suitable for this" (even though it clearly works, and has been working for many years) and "you're writing your program wrong"? It's fine to not support certain use cases because it's too much effort or otherwise too expensive. It's not fine to, as a service provider, tell people that their programs are (and I quote) "wrong". If you're okay with that then that's your choice, but for me it really turned me off sourcehut.
      - gspr 6y ago
        > You don't think it's strange for a service provider to tell people that "mercurial isn't suitable for this" (even though it clearly works, and has been working for many years) and "you're writing your program wrong"? No, not really, if done politely. Which seems to be the case here. It also might "work" to use a large crystal vase as a hammer, but it's still "doing it wrong". If anything, I'd fault sr.ht for having too vague usage policies and then telling users they are in violation of said policies. That's not good. But they are in alpha, so hopefully it's something that'll improve.