3 ms·

Is it time for a sci-hub like event to replace github? It would be better for the repository of nearly all modern public programming creativity be something mor

Is it time for a sci-hub like event to replace github? It would be better for the repository of nearly all modern public programming creativity be something more like Wikipedia, and less like LinkedIn.

easton 6y ago
Given the technical nature of the work, developers who can't jive with GitHub's policies can throw up a GitLab/Gitea server in an hour and evade censorship. And of course, as we learned with youtube-dl, the issue isn't the code/commits (since everyone gets that with a git clone), it's the issues and PR history. Any public file host has to deal with the DMCA, and (for now, barring any evil brought on by Microsoft), I'd bet on GitHub siding with the developer over the lawyers. They had lots of incentives to go the other way in the youtube-dl case and they didn't, and then they put a bunch of money in a fund if someone wants needs a lawyer to get their project back online.
- trasz 6y ago
  Should we perhaps invent a standard convention for keeping issues and PR history along with the usual source code in the repo itself?
  - yissp 6y ago
    https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki from the sqlite guy.
    - trasz 6y ago
      But this is a whole another SCM instead of Git, isn’t it? What I’ve meant was just a convention within Git, same way we have a convention for README.md and “doc/“.
  - account42 6y ago
    There is git-bug [0]. Haven't had the time to evaluate it yet, so no idea how useful it is. [0] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug
    - trasz 6y ago
      Indeed, from a quick glance this looks like what I had in mind. Thanks! Now, how can we make it popular?
viraptor 6y ago
Depending on your network model preference, there's a federated approach https://notabug.org/peers/forgefed https://notabug.org/peers/forgefed and P2P https://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/ Unfortunately both are still in pretty early stages, but active.

easton 6y ago

Given the technical nature of the work, developers who can't jive with GitHub's policies can throw up a GitLab/Gitea server in an hour and evade censorship. And of course, as we learned with youtube-dl, the issue isn't the code/commits (since everyone gets that with a git clone), it's the issues and PR history. Any public file host has to deal with the DMCA, and (for now, barring any evil brought on by Microsoft), I'd bet on GitHub siding with the developer over the lawyers. They had lots of incentives to go the other way in the youtube-dl case and they didn't, and then they put a bunch of money in a fund if someone wants needs a lawyer to get their project back online.

trasz 6y ago
Should we perhaps invent a standard convention for keeping issues and PR history along with the usual source code in the repo itself?
- yissp 6y ago
  https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki from the sqlite guy.
  - trasz 6y ago
    But this is a whole another SCM instead of Git, isn’t it? What I’ve meant was just a convention within Git, same way we have a convention for README.md and “doc/“.
- account42 6y ago
  There is git-bug [0]. Haven't had the time to evaluate it yet, so no idea how useful it is. [0] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug
  - trasz 6y ago
    Indeed, from a quick glance this looks like what I had in mind. Thanks! Now, how can we make it popular?

viraptor 6y ago

Depending on your network model preference, there's a federated approach https://notabug.org/peers/forgefed https://notabug.org/peers/forgefed and P2P https://radicle.xyz/ https://radicle.xyz/ Unfortunately both are still in pretty early stages, but active.