4 ms·

This entire project can be replaced in two different ways with just IPFS. You don't have to run IPFS to be able to add files or retrieve them (if you've added t

This entire project can be replaced in two different ways with just IPFS. You don't have to run IPFS to be able to add files or retrieve them (if you've added them on the same computer), so simply add the files without running the daemon and you're already "Offline and Private" and "IPFS without the Network". If that's not enough, you can also run your IPFS daemon with `--offline` and it won't connect to any network, giving you another way of using IPFS offline and privately. If you want to go one step further, when adding files with the IPFS CLI, you can add the flag `--only-hash` and IPFS will only hash the content without actually writing anything to disk, making it even more "offline" and "private". All in all, this seems to be a project whose author missed to read the documentation for IPFS as everything mentioned is already supported in go-ipfs, the main IPFS implementation. Edit: the title "IPFS-less IPFS" is fun too, since nebulus seems to include ipfs-core as a dependency, not really IPFS-less then I'd say :) https://github.com/skogard/nebulus/blob/480d43dc22ccd949c6ae2776131845ba94aac3a1/package.json#L15 https://github.com/skogard/nebulus/blob/480d43dc22ccd949c6ae...

skogard 5y ago
Hi there, just want to clarify that Nebulus is not a replacement for IPFS or competes with IPFS. In fact it internally uses all the features you just mentioned. In fact it's even powered by JS-IPFS and makes use of the "--only-hash" features and other features you mentioned. I needed a programmatic way to do all these things (as well as many other user friendly features that the IPFS raw protocol will never provide) and the existing IPFS libraries don't provide a way to do so, so I built it and have been using it from another project, and it was so useful that I decided to extract it out of that project into a standalone one. Just hope others find it useful as well. Thank you.
- whyrusleeping 5y ago
  This is really great stuff, thank you for making this!
- IncRnd 5y ago
  So, it isn't an IPFS-less IPFS but a layer on top of IPFS?
  - sigg3 5y ago
    It's full on IPFS with a bit of IPFS on top.
    - infogulch 5y ago
      Just like serverless: servers with a bit of servers on top.
cocktailpeanuts 5y ago
I see the “ipfs less” terminology as similar to the term “serverless”. Just like how serverless still has servers but the point is that you don’t have to maintain your own server, ipfs less does make sense in that you don’t have to run ipfs node to use it. But also just like how many people hate the term serverless, ipfs less will be hated by many as well. I guess at the end of the day what’s important is whether something provides value, and I think this is pretty cool technology in that sense. Just my two cents…
- 3np 5y ago
  The project looks useful and great, but I very much hate calling it "IPFS-less". Not only is it incorrect, it increases confusion regardless of how technical of a user you are. It is also unattractive - if it isn't IPFS (except it is), tell me what it is or does instead! Really terrible branding; consider that the currently top-voted comment has read the site enough to formulate an alternative design and still has completely misunderstood how this relates to IPFS. The rest of the site is neat, though! I hope the author reconsiders!
1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
Any ideas on the future of reduced-size IPFS utilities. For example, the go-ipfs Linux packages are somehere around 24MB. Is this a problem anyone is working on.
- whyrusleeping 5y ago
  People are working on smaller unixy tools to do fewer things well, but at least for the main codebase we are limited by go itself. Making binaries smaller is not simple at all... You might be interested in checking out the rust implementation: https://github.com/rs-ipfs/rust-ipfs https://github.com/rs-ipfs/rust-ipfs Im not actually sure how well it would work for what youre after, but it is an option!
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
    I was thinking more along the lines of splitting up the whopping 56MB single binary into smaller, individual programs. There is a version of libp2p, which is the library used by IPFS, that is written in C++. Perhaps that is another option.
    - 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
      Another option: https://github.com/ipfs-rust/ipfs-embed/ https://github.com/ipfs-rust/ipfs-embed/
- cyanydeez 5y ago
  what platforms are you targetting that cant take 24mb?
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
    Embedded systems, small form factor computers that have limited resources, older computers. 24MB is just the total for the compressed packages. The ipfs binary is actually over twice that size.

skogard 5y ago

Hi there, just want to clarify that Nebulus is not a replacement for IPFS or competes with IPFS. In fact it internally uses all the features you just mentioned. In fact it's even powered by JS-IPFS and makes use of the "--only-hash" features and other features you mentioned. I needed a programmatic way to do all these things (as well as many other user friendly features that the IPFS raw protocol will never provide) and the existing IPFS libraries don't provide a way to do so, so I built it and have been using it from another project, and it was so useful that I decided to extract it out of that project into a standalone one. Just hope others find it useful as well. Thank you.

whyrusleeping 5y ago
This is really great stuff, thank you for making this!
IncRnd 5y ago
So, it isn't an IPFS-less IPFS but a layer on top of IPFS?
- sigg3 5y ago
  It's full on IPFS with a bit of IPFS on top.
  - infogulch 5y ago
    Just like serverless: servers with a bit of servers on top.

cocktailpeanuts 5y ago

I see the “ipfs less” terminology as similar to the term “serverless”. Just like how serverless still has servers but the point is that you don’t have to maintain your own server, ipfs less does make sense in that you don’t have to run ipfs node to use it. But also just like how many people hate the term serverless, ipfs less will be hated by many as well. I guess at the end of the day what’s important is whether something provides value, and I think this is pretty cool technology in that sense. Just my two cents…

3np 5y ago
The project looks useful and great, but I very much hate calling it "IPFS-less". Not only is it incorrect, it increases confusion regardless of how technical of a user you are. It is also unattractive - if it isn't IPFS (except it is), tell me what it is or does instead! Really terrible branding; consider that the currently top-voted comment has read the site enough to formulate an alternative design and still has completely misunderstood how this relates to IPFS. The rest of the site is neat, though! I hope the author reconsiders!

1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago

Any ideas on the future of reduced-size IPFS utilities. For example, the go-ipfs Linux packages are somehere around 24MB. Is this a problem anyone is working on.

whyrusleeping 5y ago
People are working on smaller unixy tools to do fewer things well, but at least for the main codebase we are limited by go itself. Making binaries smaller is not simple at all... You might be interested in checking out the rust implementation: https://github.com/rs-ipfs/rust-ipfs https://github.com/rs-ipfs/rust-ipfs Im not actually sure how well it would work for what youre after, but it is an option!
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
  I was thinking more along the lines of splitting up the whopping 56MB single binary into smaller, individual programs. There is a version of libp2p, which is the library used by IPFS, that is written in C++. Perhaps that is another option.
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
    Another option: https://github.com/ipfs-rust/ipfs-embed/ https://github.com/ipfs-rust/ipfs-embed/
cyanydeez 5y ago
what platforms are you targetting that cant take 24mb?
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
  Embedded systems, small form factor computers that have limited resources, older computers. 24MB is just the total for the compressed packages. The ipfs binary is actually over twice that size.