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

Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

blog.tangled.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#81

Post by icy »

jrm4 wrote: post #79

I'm increasingly becoming convinced that atproto is pointless. Federation is good, but this idea of implementing "take everything with you" at the protocol level is unnecessarily complicated and centralizing. With Bluesky it might make a little more sense, but with Git? So many better, easier options here. Archive your repo and a) learn how to the do the real decentralized thing OR b) make your own centralized thing…

What’s the “real decentralised thing”? You can already archive your repo—Tangled doesn’t prevent that.

AT Protocol is great for when you’re working with the data surrounding your code: issues, pulls etc. which are much harder to move around, or even just archive from GitHub.

Case in point: Gitea (ironically), they’re stuck on GitHub because their 30k+ issues and PRs cannot be migrated from GitHub due to API rate limits.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#82

Post by icy »

rurban wrote: post #63
pm90 wrote: post #55

Github is no longer a trusted nor a reliable platform. Moving at least the oss stack to atproto (or any other open network) is an excellent way to safeguard it against Big Tech, Government censorship etc. Love to see this.

But nobody will pay for his own servers. Big OSS orgs might, but you cannot even provide PR's other than by email.

> but you cannot even provide PR's other than by email

Are you referring to Tangled? If so, that’s patently false.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#83

Post by icy »

sbinnee wrote: post #60
icy wrote: post #50

Hey HN, co-founder of Tangled here! We recently shipped a change to switch out our OAuth library—which introduced a regression, preventing new users from being added to the default knot and spindle (the git hosting server & CI runner). We just discovered this and pushed a fix—please log out and log back in again and you should be able to create repositories! Otherwise, happy to answer any questions!

Cool product! Knowing a little bit of AT protocol, I can assume that the expression you used, “social-enabled”, is related to that. Does Tangled have plans for more social features or social-enabled simply means AT protocol?

We definitely want to be very social-first down the line! Our focus at present is to nail the core features first, however. The vision is to build Tangled to be a indie/community-focused code forge.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#84

Post by Zambyte »

udev4096 wrote: post #77

Why not improve upon https://radicle.xyz ? It's been running for a while now with promising future. From my naive understanding of running a radicle node, it consumes around 40G of storage for the current network of 5k repos

The social factor. As someone who is very active on Bluesky, the social inertia of Tangled is great. I like Radicle too, but it's harder to collaborate with people, because it's harder to sell to people.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#85

Post by IshKebab »

hamandcheese wrote: post #73

I was pleased to see that this has CI pipeline support, but am saddened to see that it looks roughly GitHub-actions shaped. I don't see the point in writing a sequence of serial steps in YAML. A bash script can already do that. YAML configuration for pipelines should be focused on expressing the dependencies of a DAG, not the serial execution of a program. Buildkite got this right.

The point of doing it declaratively is that you can easily expose all that information in the UI, and process it to set up the pipeline in the first place (multiple runners, which OS they run, dependencies between steps).

I agree most of your `run` steps should just be one or two lines to call out to another script though, and you shouldn't split things into multiple steps unless necessary.

How does Buildkite do it? Their website doesn't seem clear but it looks like it also uses YAML, you can just use a script to generate it. Gitlab supports that somewhat awkwardly, and I've definitely had one project where that would have been useful (though I couldn't convince my colleagues to do it).

I don't think it would be difficult to add support for it anyway.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#86

Post by jrm4 »

icy wrote: post #81
jrm4 wrote: post #79

I'm increasingly becoming convinced that atproto is pointless. Federation is good, but this idea of implementing "take everything with you" at the protocol level is unnecessarily complicated and centralizing. With Bluesky it might make a little more sense, but with Git? So many better, easier options here. Archive your repo and a) learn how to the do the real decentralized thing OR b) make your own centralized thing…

What’s the “real decentralised thing”? You can already archive your repo—Tangled doesn’t prevent that. AT Protocol is great for when you’re working with the data surrounding your code: issues, pulls etc. which are much harder to move around, or even just archive from GitHub. Case in point: Gitea (ironically), they’re stuck on GitHub because their 30k+ issues and PRs cannot be migrated from GitHub due to API rate limi…

"Real decentralised thing" here I meant 'using Git in that way that was kind of invented for but no one seems to do,' aka distributed/decentralized with no central server at all.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#87

Post by account42 »

rurban wrote: post #63
pm90 wrote: post #55

Github is no longer a trusted nor a reliable platform. Moving at least the oss stack to atproto (or any other open network) is an excellent way to safeguard it against Big Tech, Government censorship etc. Love to see this.

But nobody will pay for his own servers. Big OSS orgs might, but you cannot even provide PR's other than by email.

> but you cannot even provide PR's other than by email

That is a feature, not a bug.

Re: Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto

#88

Post by oooyay »

hayden_dev wrote: post #56
oooyay wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inevitably someone will end up paying for Tangled. Their architecture demands an infrastructure piece that actually hosts the forges and PDSs through BlueSky won't always be free. They're also non-trivial to run.

The vast majority of this comment is false, btw The infrastructure to host the forges is still a problem yes, but PDSes are VERY trivial to run, they’re just a Node.js app and they have a Compose file to make running it a quick shell script to run. And they will always be free, Bluesky is well aware that making access to the platform a paid thing would kill the project outright, and even then the code is open source…

I've been working on an atproto side project. These are very much reasonable considerations when dealing in any atproto application. It is truthful to say that most BlueSky users do not use a personal PDS. It is reasonable to say Tangled will likely trend the same way. It is reasonable to say these are things anyone building on atproto must account for.

It's also factual to say that Tangled is substantially different from BlueSky. Their AppView is stateful, they synchronize via NATS, and PDSs are linked beyond that. Again, substantially more complex than your average atproto architecture.

Post reply on HN