5 ms·

Zot seems interesting, this is the first time I see it. On a quickl look it seems like Pi, but in Go. I was hoping to embed Pi into some of our internal project

Zot seems interesting, this is the first time I see it. On a quickl look it seems like Pi, but in Go. I was hoping to embed Pi into some of our internal projects and the typescript stuff was blocking me, I'll definitely give Zot a look.

deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
patriceckhart 4mo ago
pi is awesome, quite possibly the best OSS tool out there. You should definitely give it a shot if it fits your stack. zot has become my daily driver. I didnt build zot to compete. I built it to really get a feel for how harnesses work, and I do it with Go simply because I love the language. More on that here: https://www.patriceckhart.com/blog/posts/2026-04-23/why-i-built-zot https://www.patriceckhart.com/blog/posts/2026-04-23/why-i-bu...
- hydra-f 4mo ago
  What makes pi so awesome? It feels as though the whole thing is held together with tape. Poor performance, poor UX. Security is an afterthought. Not that versatile (as of yet). You certainly are better off writing your own personal harness.
  - patriceckhart 4mo ago
    pi is extensible at every turn. thats what makes it special. zot is more limited there.
    - hydra-f 4mo ago
      Extensibility has a cost which affects all my earlier points. Pi is fine for testing things you might include in your harness, but that's where I would draw the line
      - patriceckhart 4mo ago
        You rocking your own harness? Public by any chance? If so, mind if I take a look?
        0gs 4mo ago
        i am somebody else but my Show HN got zero engagement so please feel free to look at mine: http://github.com/0gsd/enough http://github.com/0gsd/enough n.b. not a coding harness. it's for writing. but extensibility is a big (perhaps too big) part of it. http://enough.support http://enough.support has some of the principles outlined.
        Terretta 4mo ago
        Here is some engagement: your project may be hard to engage with unless someone is highly motivated? > "this is because `enough` imposes very few paradigms on your wordflows -- in a world of exponential possibility, most people have as many things they want to do as ways they prefer to do them." OK, but, having read the GitHub and the reverse chronology discourse, but not doing the install, I cannot immediately tell what anyone's wordflow might be or whether this could be helpful in any way. Usually from looking at a project I can imagine a venn diagram of things I want to do and things the thing does. Not here. Also, I felt I was pointed to principles, but rather than principles of the tools purpose, I found motivations for the author and meta comments about the discourse site itself, rather than motivations to use the tool or comments on its application to authoring assistance. Rather than those, ironically the best entry point seems to be the agent guide: https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/docs/AGENT_GUIDE_v010.md https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/docs/AGENT_GUIDE_v0... From there it appears you're trying to make a combination of humane/verbal human-driving-the-loop document reviser (e.g. the colored text visualizer and agentic tool to grab references by color for other tool consideration), and a substrate (cough) for arbitrary "paradigms" of working towards producing writing of a given "motivation". From there, one goes into the `defaults` to find translation and text planning paradigms: https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/default.md https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/... https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/text-planning.md https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/... While the spelunking approach can give the idea, is there any writeup anywhere that walks someone through the concept and an applied example from the POV of the human who made this? I note non-ironically the text planner has no explainer in the example document types. :-)

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

patriceckhart 4mo ago

pi is awesome, quite possibly the best OSS tool out there. You should definitely give it a shot if it fits your stack. zot has become my daily driver. I didnt build zot to compete. I built it to really get a feel for how harnesses work, and I do it with Go simply because I love the language. More on that here: https://www.patriceckhart.com/blog/posts/2026-04-23/why-i-built-zot https://www.patriceckhart.com/blog/posts/2026-04-23/why-i-bu...

hydra-f 4mo ago
What makes pi so awesome? It feels as though the whole thing is held together with tape. Poor performance, poor UX. Security is an afterthought. Not that versatile (as of yet). You certainly are better off writing your own personal harness.
- patriceckhart 4mo ago
  pi is extensible at every turn. thats what makes it special. zot is more limited there.
  - hydra-f 4mo ago
    Extensibility has a cost which affects all my earlier points. Pi is fine for testing things you might include in your harness, but that's where I would draw the line
    - patriceckhart 4mo ago
      You rocking your own harness? Public by any chance? If so, mind if I take a look?
      - 0gs 4mo ago
        i am somebody else but my Show HN got zero engagement so please feel free to look at mine: http://github.com/0gsd/enough http://github.com/0gsd/enough n.b. not a coding harness. it's for writing. but extensibility is a big (perhaps too big) part of it. http://enough.support http://enough.support has some of the principles outlined.
        Terretta 4mo ago
        Here is some engagement: your project may be hard to engage with unless someone is highly motivated? > "this is because `enough` imposes very few paradigms on your wordflows -- in a world of exponential possibility, most people have as many things they want to do as ways they prefer to do them." OK, but, having read the GitHub and the reverse chronology discourse, but not doing the install, I cannot immediately tell what anyone's wordflow might be or whether this could be helpful in any way. Usually from looking at a project I can imagine a venn diagram of things I want to do and things the thing does. Not here. Also, I felt I was pointed to principles, but rather than principles of the tools purpose, I found motivations for the author and meta comments about the discourse site itself, rather than motivations to use the tool or comments on its application to authoring assistance. Rather than those, ironically the best entry point seems to be the agent guide: https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/docs/AGENT_GUIDE_v010.md https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/docs/AGENT_GUIDE_v0... From there it appears you're trying to make a combination of humane/verbal human-driving-the-loop document reviser (e.g. the colored text visualizer and agentic tool to grab references by color for other tool consideration), and a substrate (cough) for arbitrary "paradigms" of working towards producing writing of a given "motivation". From there, one goes into the `defaults` to find translation and text planning paradigms: https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/default.md https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/... https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/text-planning.md https://github.com/0gsd/enough/blob/main/defaults/paradigms/... While the spelunking approach can give the idea, is there any writeup anywhere that walks someone through the concept and an applied example from the POV of the human who made this? I note non-ironically the text planner has no explainer in the example document types. :-)