> Mobile support to come.
In 2026 not being mobile first is a bit of a disappointment to be honest
Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
51–60 of 322 posts
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#52Interesting stuff! I really like the design philosophy you're applying here, where the browser/web behaviour is actually part of the UX. Pretty rare for web application nowadays! If I could make one suggestion, I really like the old MacOS "inspector" pattern. Basically a consistent way to get meta-information about any "thing" the user chooses to inspect. Your right sidebar is going towards that, but it would need so…
thank you!
i'm not aware of the old macOS inspector pattern, but this sounds super interesting and i agree with the critique of inconsistency in github's behavior.
this reminds me a tad of superhuman's right panel too which auto-populates upon writing a time (or typing a name i believe?), which is a feature i do find personally useful as well.
i haven't thought seriously about hovers on nouns quite yet, but this is giving me much to munch on.
thank you sincerely this is dope.
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#53This is a violation of Git's trademark, and your usage of it is expressly prohibited by their policy.
https://git-scm.com/about/trademark
> [...] you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service.
> Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they are subject to explicit licensing arrangements that pre-date, and thus take precedence, over this Policy.
You might've known that if you hadn't vibe-launched this while for some reason marketing it as anti-AI, but here we are in a world where basic research is a dead art.
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#54I love the design. Clean and refreshing - you start at the left and every sub element goes to the right. Like a file browser. And the commit screen is dense but super readable. I would move the summary column from the right of the README to the left of the README on the /home screen (and call /home the /README).
Loading files is very slow but I assume that's because HN is hammering the server.
I am not a believer in negative advertising. So I don't give a poop you are anti-ai. Or "better" than Github (better for who??). Just imply you are a code forge thats made for serious developers who need something engineered to be fast and reliable.
I wish you the best of luck, I can see Linear coming out with git repos after coming out with a diff reader. I have a suspicion there's space for many code forges in the market as you build out more features, especially if you lean into your products hacker-y-ness
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#55This is a violation of Git's trademark, and your usage of it is expressly prohibited by their policy. https://git-scm.com/about/trademark > [...] you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service. > Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they are subject to…
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#56This is a violation of Git's trademark, and your usage of it is expressly prohibited by their policy. https://git-scm.com/about/trademark > [...] you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service. > Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they are subject to…
I’d love to hear an IP lawyer weigh in on this, because I’ve never heard of this kind of thing before. It doesn’t seem correct that you can use trademark alone like this to extend beyond the actual word used in the trademark. Maybe it’s from licensing or something, ie maybe if a product uses the actual git product, then the git license means you can’t use the name as part of a word.
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#57> anti-AI
> mobile support to come
Cmon lol. Give opus 20min and it will give you a mobile site throw in a better-looking desktop site for fun.
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#58This is a violation of Git's trademark, and your usage of it is expressly prohibited by their policy. https://git-scm.com/about/trademark > [...] you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service. > Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they are subject to…
I’d love to hear an IP lawyer weigh in on this, because I’ve never heard of this kind of thing before. It doesn’t seem correct that you can use trademark alone like this to extend beyond the actual word used in the trademark. Maybe it’s from licensing or something, ie maybe if a product uses the actual git product, then the git license means you can’t use the name as part of a word.
Trademark law is ridiculously slanted in favour of existing rightsholders. The most famous example I know of is "McSleep Inn", which was sued by McDonalds and forced to change their name. I think that ruling was complete bullshit, because Mc is so generic and usually a prime factor of trademark law is whether the businesses operate in similar domains, but it goes to show how broad the protections can be. Something like "GitFoo", which is explicitly being used specifically on a site for hosting Git repositories, doesn't stand a chance in hell, and rightfully so because this is actually trying to take advantage of Git's name to market their product.
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#59This is a violation of Git's trademark, and your usage of it is expressly prohibited by their policy. https://git-scm.com/about/trademark > [...] you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service. > Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they are subject to…
I mean OK, valid, and they really should get on it.
But you are squinting really hard if you equate "programmers not being good lawyers" with "they obviously vibe-launched the product".
Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust
#60I mean, no offence but nothing is more of a signal of marketing fluff to me than saying “built in Rust” or “anti-AI”
Tell us why we should care outside of the marketing fluff - these aren’t highlights - if anything they are quite off putting.
Your project needs to stand on its own actual merits.
Critique over, congratulations on launching something or building something anyway.
But what makes this different? And why have you chosen that philosophy - outside of marketing fluff