Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

gitdot.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 322 posts

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#231

Post by cztomsik »

analog_daddy wrote: post #141
smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

No, it is an advantage. I am not a rust evangelist, I am not a rust programmer or programmer at all; however while evaluating tools to use, anything written in Rust and Go at-least gets me to look at the project in more detail, since they most likely are able to ship statically linked binaries, which has been one of the key criteria for my personal evaluation of tools to select and use. So, you might not consider it…

"single binary, no dependencies besides crypto" would be an advantage, "written in Rust" tells nothing, except (successfully) trying to clickbait

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#233

Post by mgianluc »

First of all, kudos for the work.

Personally I dont care if it is written in Rust or anything else. What I do care is stability, security and features.

I would have enhanced the dashboard a little bit. I understand most of the work was done in the backend. But dashboard is what folks see first. and might lead someone incorrectly judging the work just by looking at that.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#234

Post by dudisubekti »

ClikeX wrote: post #204
dudisubekti wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? This doesn't make sense, how is it Rust's fault if people are being lazy and tribal?

It's not the fault of the language itself. But the behaviour gives people bad vibes, and they don't want to associate with the community anymore. Keep in mind. Learning a language usually also means you interact with the people in the ecosystem at some point.

The community seems normal? Take this popular thread for example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1tcrmjs/rewrite_bun_i...

Many seems to be very skeptical and concerned about Bun being vibecoded.

The rest of the subreddit is basically people showing off their work.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#235

Post by trwhite »

mgianluc wrote: post #233

First of all, kudos for the work. Personally I dont care if it is written in Rust or anything else. What I do care is stability, security and features. I would have enhanced the dashboard a little bit. I understand most of the work was done in the backend. But dashboard is what folks see first. and might lead someone incorrectly judging the work just by looking at that.

It seems to be a trend of HN lately.

Downvote me into oblivion or whatever: It's not relevant to me in the slightest whether you built it in Rust or not, or even Python, Go, Java, Node, PHP etc. There is lots of great and terrible, fast and slow software written in each. OP might only have 3 months of programming experience for all I know.

Why is "made with Rust" any more relevant than "made with Go" to an end user of a software product? It just doesn't matter.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#237

Post by thiht »

dainank wrote: post #223
thiht wrote: post #217

Saying it’s better than GitHub is a bit of a stretch right now, when it doesn’t even support mobile and looks like the stylesheets failed to load

I agree that such a claim is a stretch, however, I personally love the minimalist look (it has its own charm). Saying it 'looks like the stylesheets failed to load' is your own exaggeration.

> Saying it 'looks like the stylesheets failed to load' is your own exaggeration

On mobile I literally refreshed the page because I thought my wi-fi broke... Maybe it looks a bit better on desktop

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#238

Post by devsda »

lelanthran wrote: post #161
smetannik wrote: post #134

Please, stop using "written in Rust" as some kind of advantage or killer feature.

From what I can see, it would be more accurate if they wrote "slopped by LLMs" :-) I am indeed curious to see how an agent-coded project turns out in the long term. Coherencey from LLMs decreases as the source increases in volume, waiting to see how this all turns out.

> Coherencey from LLMs decreases as the source increases in volume, waiting to see how this all turns out.

I wonder if feature velocity closely tracks LLM context management innovations.

May be this encourages more modular systems if those improvements can't come fast enough.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#239

Post by sprybear »

Developers can champion their preferred language all they want, whether it's Rust, dirt, or grime. What matters to me is having viable alternative platforms and seeing active experimentation with new projects and features.

Looking forward to seeing even more features, gitdot.

Re: Show HN: Gitdot – A better GitHub. Open-source, written in Rust

#240

Post by dbdr »

gspr wrote: post #225
berkes wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Written in Rust" signals some common attributes. Fast, Safe, Lightweight, Statically linked (plop a precompiled binary in ~/.local/bin and run it), few/shallow dependencies, senior developers, "Done" software. Now, certainly no guarantees, enough counter-examples, I know. And attributes that one can get with anything from PHP via Javascript to Lisp as well. Some attributes have stronger correlation than others too.…

I'm happy to label myself a Rust fanboy, but > few/shallow dependencies is just flat-out wrong. There's (sadly) a big culture of sprawling, deep dependencies in the Rust community. There are of course many counterexamples too, but it's definitely not correct that Rust signals the virtue you refer to. (Incidentally, the misguided idea among some that as long as a dependency isn't through FFI, it doesn't count as a dep…

> the misguided idea among some that as long as a dependency isn't through FFI, it doesn't count as a dependency, is one of the things I dislike the most about Rust culture

I have not heard that idea a single time. There's definitely the idea that FFI dependencies "count more" / add more baggage (because there's a bigger risk that the build fails, it's harder to investigate memory safety, ...). Absolutely not that a non-FFI dependency "does not count".

Post reply on HN