5 ms·
Git already is decentralized as a core design principle. No reason to bring dumb crypto stuff into it.
by malermeister 4y ago
Git already is decentralized as a core design principle. No reason to bring dumb crypto stuff into it.
- nkozyra 4y agoTo be fair, he's not suggesting an alternative to git.
- Touche 4y agoNostr is not crypto. The bounty is, but the tech is not.
- codetrotter 4y agoThis is not about decentralising git itself, which is already decentralised. This is about a decentralised alternative to GitHub. All of the other parts that they have on top of the git hosting. Issues, PRs, stars, followers, everything. GitHub the social network. The thing that MS paid $$$ to buy. The reason that people centralise themselves on GitHub. That’s what we need a decentralised alternative for. So that everything everyone is doing on GitHub can be done without involvement and rule from a giant corporation and their commercial interests.
- hellisothers 4y agoSo that eventually it gets recentralized under something like Opensea or Coinbase?
- leesalminen 4y agoNostr does not use a blockchain, nor NFTs, nor tokens, etc. The fact that someone is offering to pay a bounty in BTC for the creation of a Github alternative using the Nostr protocol does not make Nostr, nor this Github alternative, a crypto token.
- malermeister 4y agoWhat's wrong with self-hosted gitlab?
- codetrotter 4y agoIf you self-host GitLab and I come across your repo, and I want to submit an issue I’ve found with your code. I then have to go through the trouble of making a new account for me on your instance, assuming that your instance even allows me to create an account. Don’t get me wrong, self-hosted GitLab is very useful too. But it is different from the goal of replacing GitHub with a decentralised alternative. The decentralised alternative to GitHub should work such that there is no one party that decides over accounts. You should be able to float freely around the network of instances. You should be able to follow other people and star their repositories. People, and code, should exist independently of the individual instances in the network. Any instance could ban you, and any instance could ban some of the people you follow or repositories you are following. But the network as a whole can still allow you to continue to follow others and others to follow you. Your identity is not tied to the instance. Your repositories are not tied to the instance. If one instance bans you, you can access the same network with the same identity from another instance. And others can still find you with that same identity over the network.
- zmnd 4y agoHow much time account creation realistically takes? How does that compare to the actual PR creation time? You will need to spend significantly more time on writing code, debugging, testing, creating PR that follows all the guidelines, potentially signing legal docs etc. If you can’t spend 15s on creating a new account I’m not sure I would be interested in accepting such PR.
- mhluongo 4y agoIf hosted Gitlab is so easy for contribution, why is the larger social graph on GitHub?
- adolph 4y agoHmmm, “dumb crypto stuff” you say? At a high level, a git commit hash is a SHA1 hash of the state of the git repository at the time of the commit. https://medium.com/@jonathan_finch/git-commit-hash-number-theory-770f67ec492d https://medium.com/@jonathan_finch/git-commit-hash-number-th...
- ekianjo 4y ago> Git already is decentralized as a core design principle. No reason to bring dumb crypto stuff into it. You do realize that github != git, right?