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

We need a federation of forges

blog.tangled.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 424 posts

Re: We need a federation of forges

#331

Post by bombcar »

tardedmeme wrote: post #262
tobylane wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a project member, I want users to already be logged in to the bug tracker. The lack of friction, likely from being the network effect winner, is key. I know fossil has this, but people don't have their private keys in fossil, they (I) don't even have fossil installed.

Whatever happened to OpenID, anyway? That was supposed to be federated one-click login. If the problem is login, then only the login needs to be federated, and this approach leaves the rest of the system more flexible as sites can have different bug tracking features without becoming incompatible with the federation.

Apparently there are two competing ID federation setups, and a bunch of "login with Google/Apple/Facebook/ID.me" and nobody can agree on anything.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#332

Post by what »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #305
knotbin wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ATproto federates in a very different way than Mastodon. There is no concept of "instances" on ATproto. Your account is hosted on a PDS and you sign into the app with your PDS sign-in and records go to your PDS, but everything on the app is from what's called an "AppView" which provides a centralized view of all data in all PDSes so it feels just like you're using a regular centralized app. But there can be multiple…

> There is no concept of "instances" on ATproto. Regardless of name and precise technical details, there are central service components that can ban you. If a proper ecosystem of those ever springs up then the equivalent of fediblock (ie guilt by association) oriented at individual accounts or PDS is the next logical step. At present (last I checked) there's only (approximately) one primary provider plus blacksky mak…

Don’t they already have extensive block lists that you can “subscribe” to? I think some official blue sky account was added to some and they got super mad?

Re: We need a federation of forges

#333

Post by JoshTriplett »

cxr wrote: post #323
miki123211 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Atom is pull, Atproto is push. Atom was designed for news, before social media existed, where 15+ minute polling times were (borderline) acceptable. Atproto was designed for social media, in an age of Twitter users getting their news in seconds, to the point of being able to comment on live events play-by-play. There's no coming back from that world. With that said, I wish both Mastodon and Atproto supported opt-in p…

> Atproto was designed for social media, in an age of Twitter users getting their news in seconds, to the point of being able to comment on live events play-by-play. And this is widely recognized by now to have been a very bad thing, even/especially those most susceptible to its draw. It's strange that you're framing it as a strength and not a lament. > There's no coming back from that world. You can't say that when…

> And this is widely recognized by now to have been a very bad thing

It has upsides and downsides. The ability to live-post an event, or get up-to-the-minute news, can be a good thing.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#334

Post by Klonoar »

tcfhgj wrote: post #271
malicka wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people want to find software, they search GitHub. If you self-host a forge, no one will ever find your software unless you’re a preestablished big name (like Blender). To avoid throwing your code into the void, you’re pretty much forced to mirror with GitHub, at least. To avoid this and make smaller forges as a block a viable competitor, there needs to be a singular network that solves discoverability and lets you…

> If people want to find software, they search GitHub. people really do that?

The only time I ever search GitHub is when I'm trying to debug or understand some esoteric API (usually Apple-specific) and I'm looking for anybody else who has actually used the god damned thing.

If I'm looking for software/libs/etc, GitHub search is the absolute last thing I would even think to look for.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#335

Post by tynanpurdy »

kajman wrote: post #225
danabramov wrote: post #62

If anyone here’s curious about atproto data model, I wrote an into here: https://overreacted.io/a-social-filesystem/ It’s a bit long but should give you a really crisp picture.

Understatement, probably. Your blog posts are so far the best introduction I've seen to ATProto. Is there any tagging I missed that collects them all in one place?

I’ve gathered a few here! (On an atproto social bookmarking site :) https://semble.so/profile/tynanpurdy.com/collections/3m5epi5...

Re: We need a federation of forges

#336

Post by hmokiguess »

ddosmax556 wrote: post #312
hmokiguess wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's both and, it's a symptom of exponential usage and a problem with infrastructure. The question you aren't asking is "Why is it a problem with GitHub's infrastructure?" the answer to that lies somewhere in between: Microsoft + Azure + Copilot. Now tell me which of those have anything to do with GitHub as we know it?

Why is it a problem with Githubs infrastructure!? Bcs any website on the planet will struggle when they have to fulfill 30x capacity within 1-2y, no matter which tech stack they're built on, including federated networks. I'm not sure why you're throwikg Copilot in there, you don't like it? Github as we know it is gone, forever, it will never come back, except for niche hobby clones with .001% capacity that nobody wil…

I guess you’re right, in part I’m attributing the growth to Copilot and over prioritization of it alongside the AI feature factory galore and that’s where I’m coming from, but thinking again a lot of the acceleration of normal usage comes from AI usage through other vendors ending up in GitHub too.

I don’t know their internals, though clearly they choose to tightly couple every major GitHub system to the AI offering, in my eyes that seems like part of the problem (plus Azure cloud migration on top because Microsoft sounds like a disaster).

Anyways, you sound angry.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#337

Post by BeetleB »

horsawlarway wrote: post #251
steveklabnik wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you cherry pick complicated commands, and remove all context, sure, they look cryptic. I wrote that tutorial, and literally only one of those is relevant to my day to day work: jj new o, which means “make a new change on top of the change named o”. Yes, if you remove the context that “o” is on your screen and highlighted, it looks complex. It’s the same with the other “jj new” command: you’re producing a merge by…

> If you cherry pick complicated commands, and remove all context, sure, they look cryptic. Sure I'm definitely not playing fair, but I am cherry picking from the intro tutorial you put together, so I'm not going crazy either :P I think my primary issue is that jj feels like it wants to control how I work more than git does. Mentally - I just don't want to have to think about changes as often as jj seems to want to t…

> Basically - the vibe I got from it was: if you're a person who really likes making checklists, or complex tickets with subtasks and groupings and labels - jj is something you're going to like. If you're just interested in writing code and not so interested in source control outside of the ability to occasionally "snapshot this folder"... it's probably not going to be your thing.

This is a bizarre take, as most jj users just take your paragraph above and do a s/jj/git.

The benefit most people find in jj is that you can do stuff easily without having to think much.

There is no separate concept for stash and index (and yet you still have them in jj, and use them without giving them special names).

In principle, there's no real distinction between merge and commit.

You don't need to know the difference with/without --hard for git reset. You just do a "jj undo" no matter what.

Merge conflicts are not stress inducing. And if you're in the middle of an ugly merge conflict, you can just say "Screw it all" and quickly get back to before you did the rebase/merge - just keep hitting "undo" until you get there.

jj literally has a much smaller cognitive overhead than git does.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#338

Post by Zetaphor »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #274
cxr wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Atproto isn’t “many servers sending messages to each other”. It’s structured more like RSS Except that, crucially, RSS/Atom plays well with static nodes (e.g. personal websites generated with Jekyll/Hugo/whatever—or even written by hand[1]), and Atproto does not. (Nor does Mastodon; previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30862612 >.) It'd be great if the complexities needed to support the "Atmosphere" wer…

There's always some Gemini protocol faction that shows up to yell that everything is wrong and we have to keep hand assembling our packets by hand or it'll never work. Atproto's PDS is the root idea that everything extends off of, is the "social filesystem" that you control. There's a protocol objective to be able to spread your data around widely and for folks to be able to cryptographically check that that data cam…

I host my PDS on a server from Racknerd that costs me $15/year

Re: We need a federation of forges

#339

Post by spartanatreyu »

collinmanderson wrote: post #91

Why not Just™ store all PR/Issues content as markdown on a separate branch along side the code itself? Why do we need a new protocol?

Developers don't want to have to deal with merge conflicts or silent auto-merge failures in their issue tracking.

Re: We need a federation of forges

#340

Post by shimman »

zachlatta wrote: post #116
shimman wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VC money is absolutely not a means to an end, what is signals is that the company doesn't care about community and only cares about profit. I'm with the OP you're replying to. Taking VC is an albatross that means a large portion of devs will never trust you or use your services (outside of bleeding your funds dry). If this place truly cared about community they should have made a non-profit or some type of NGO, basic…

This kind of absolutism is crazy. People who are doing 90% of what we want them to do should be greatly celebrated and rewarded. Else we penalize idealistic people who are not perfect instead of penalizing the people who are actually doing the opposite of what we care about (ex. Autodesk). Do you want software to become as closed source as mechanical engineering? No! So let's celebrate people building software that's…

This kind of absolutism is absolute necessary against tech leadership that are anti-democracy.
Post reply on HN