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

Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

monicahq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 144 posts

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#51

Post by pwdisswordfish9 »

robinhood wrote: post #37

Author of Monica/Chandler here. Thanks for posting this. As others have pointed out, we are rewriting Monica from scratch, codename Chandler: https://github.com/monicahq/chandler We've also written OfficeLife, an open source tool to manage your employees: https://github.com/officelifehq/officelife , yet to be released. I think we have too many ideas and side projects :-)

I usually despise comments that point out that two pieces of (almost always unrelated) software share the same (or a similar) name. That doesn't apply in this case—

Chandler has not only already been used for another piece of software, it has been used for something in what is roughly the same space. The other Chandler was discontinued >10 years ago, but I had to double check and triple check to suss out whether or not your Chandler is actually a reboot + a rewrite. And I'm still hedging (but I think the answer is "no, they're completely separate"). That's a confusing amount of similarity.

EDIT: it looks like this has been pointed out. Even though it's "just" a codename, I'd recommend changing it to something like "chauncey" or "bingaling" or "miss-bong" or "skidmark" or something.

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#52

Post by TylerE »

pwdisswordfish9 wrote: post #51
robinhood wrote: post #37

Author of Monica/Chandler here. Thanks for posting this. As others have pointed out, we are rewriting Monica from scratch, codename Chandler: https://github.com/monicahq/chandler We've also written OfficeLife, an open source tool to manage your employees: https://github.com/officelifehq/officelife , yet to be released. I think we have too many ideas and side projects :-)

I usually despise comments that point out that two pieces of (almost always unrelated) software share the same (or a similar) name. That doesn't apply in this case— Chandler has not only already been used for another piece of software, it has been used for something in what is roughly the same space. The other Chandler was discontinued >10 years ago, but I had to double check and triple check to suss out whether or n…

wooosh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends#Cast_and_characters

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#53

Post by BostonEnginerd »

pwdisswordfish9 wrote: post #51
robinhood wrote: post #37

Author of Monica/Chandler here. Thanks for posting this. As others have pointed out, we are rewriting Monica from scratch, codename Chandler: https://github.com/monicahq/chandler We've also written OfficeLife, an open source tool to manage your employees: https://github.com/officelifehq/officelife , yet to be released. I think we have too many ideas and side projects :-)

I usually despise comments that point out that two pieces of (almost always unrelated) software share the same (or a similar) name. That doesn't apply in this case— Chandler has not only already been used for another piece of software, it has been used for something in what is roughly the same space. The other Chandler was discontinued >10 years ago, but I had to double check and triple check to suss out whether or n…

The Monica /Chandler thing is a reference to the 90s television show “Friends”.

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#54

Post by emptysea »

robinhood wrote: post #37

Author of Monica/Chandler here. Thanks for posting this. As others have pointed out, we are rewriting Monica from scratch, codename Chandler: https://github.com/monicahq/chandler We've also written OfficeLife, an open source tool to manage your employees: https://github.com/officelifehq/officelife , yet to be released. I think we have too many ideas and side projects :-)

Curious to learn more about the rewrite, do you have and docs handy?

Edit: should have scrolled down more: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33612776

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#55

Post by scrumper »

TylerE wrote: post #52
pwdisswordfish9 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually despise comments that point out that two pieces of (almost always unrelated) software share the same (or a similar) name. That doesn't apply in this case— Chandler has not only already been used for another piece of software, it has been used for something in what is roughly the same space. The other Chandler was discontinued >10 years ago, but I had to double check and triple check to suss out whether or n…

wooosh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends#Cast_and_characters

Parent isn’t wrong. Chandler was a very interesting distributed PIM in (I think) the very early 2000s. It collapsed under the weight of its own ambition but it’s a significant piece of software history, one of those alternative paths.

And yes it’s a TV character too, but Parent isn’t wrong to point out the name collision.

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#56

Post by ParadisoShlee »

robinhood wrote: post #37

Author of Monica/Chandler here. Thanks for posting this. As others have pointed out, we are rewriting Monica from scratch, codename Chandler: https://github.com/monicahq/chandler We've also written OfficeLife, an open source tool to manage your employees: https://github.com/officelifehq/officelife , yet to be released. I think we have too many ideas and side projects :-)

Glad to see there is a future for monica. I've been a paid Monica user for a long time, and I've mostly been looking forward to a mobile app.

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#57

Post by lupire »

muratsu wrote: post #11
jms703 wrote: post #7

The authors are rewriting this software under a new name. https://github.com/monicahq/chandler

Does anyone know why they are rewriting the whole thing? The github page doesn't mention the reasoning behind the decision

Rewrites are more fun than solving user problems

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#58

Post by TylerE »

scrumper wrote: post #55
TylerE wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wooosh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends#Cast_and_characters

Parent isn’t wrong. Chandler was a very interesting distributed PIM in (I think) the very early 2000s. It collapsed under the weight of its own ambition but it’s a significant piece of software history, one of those alternative paths. And yes it’s a TV character too, but Parent isn’t wrong to point out the name collision.

Your're wooshing yourself too. Chandler was a character on Friends. The parent project, Monica, is ALSO a character on Friends.

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#59

Post by MarcelOlsz »

n8cpdx wrote: post #49
beckingz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you structure your data?

Not the person you asked, but I came to leave a similar comment. I was curious about Monica, but for a variety of reasons it didn’t click for me. I use obsidian for tracking meetings, people, and documents in a civic engagement sphere. So hundreds of entities and a few meetings a week. I have folders for interpersonal meetings (calls, coffee dates, one on ones), public/group meetings, people, and a few other things.…

I would pay good money for a proper Obsidian course. I can't manage my notes to save my life. Infinite sideways bullet point pyramids.

Re: Monica: Open-source personal relationship manager

#60

Post by spoonjim »

pwdisswordfish9 wrote: post #51
robinhood wrote: post #37

Author of Monica/Chandler here. Thanks for posting this. As others have pointed out, we are rewriting Monica from scratch, codename Chandler: https://github.com/monicahq/chandler We've also written OfficeLife, an open source tool to manage your employees: https://github.com/officelifehq/officelife , yet to be released. I think we have too many ideas and side projects :-)

I usually despise comments that point out that two pieces of (almost always unrelated) software share the same (or a similar) name. That doesn't apply in this case— Chandler has not only already been used for another piece of software, it has been used for something in what is roughly the same space. The other Chandler was discontinued >10 years ago, but I had to double check and triple check to suss out whether or n…

In software, discontinued 10 years ago is like a language that’s been dead for 5,000.
Post reply on HN