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

Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#81

Post by packetlost »

chrisweekly wrote: post #65
packetlost wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found it lacking, especially with kinda buggy interaction with the vim keybindings. Obsidian's data model, a huge selling point to some, really hinders it too. Logseq's new db format let's you treat any block as a page, metadata and all which can be super helpful.

I'll stick with my portable local-filesystem markdown over any db format (let alone with Obsidian's Coreview and Dataview plugins, and Bases, for db-like querying).

And more power to you. I find the SQLite database of plain-text to be a worthwhile tradeoff to grow past the limitations of plain markdown files.

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#82

Post by utilize1808 »

ezst wrote: post #73
utilize1808 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means there is little point in providing a notes organiser when the notes can organise themselves (via LLM).

Except that the notes don't organize themselves, you just offload to a non-deterministic black-box to "lose them for you". Many (although, not all, true) give their PKMS a very opinionated shape, because the way knowledge is organized and structured matters as much, if not more, than the sum of the individual facts. Personally, I'm not interested, but to each their own.

Are you more deterministic than an instruction-following black-box? I doubt it. Also, such organization practice mostly becomes a mechanical routine after the initial experimentation phase. Good riddance, I'd say.

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#83

Post by ezst »

flkiwi wrote: post #80
ezst wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I needed the "edit anywhere" capability, too, had a keen interest in logseq as a result, and now can't recommend Trilium more. https://triliumnotes.org/

For me, Trillium is far too busy, and it’s not an outliner. It’s great software though. (Believe me, I have tried the whole universe of these apps.)

> and it's not an outliner

We probably have that in common that I went through a pretty long and exhausting journey of looking for the right note-taking app/PKMS, but while I started with the conviction that I needed an outliner, I landed elsewhere.

I do appreciate the theoretical beauty of "everything is a block" (and for the record, that is approximated pretty closely in Trilium by "(almost) everything is a note"), but the execution is often messy (tags/models hierarchies are hard to build and keep consistent/up to date, there is always the duality between embedding and referring because sometimes a sub-block is a block, and that forces you into defining more types or risk losing context and not being able to find the note but by name, if you can even remember it, etc). Tana and its "supertags" comes pretty close to the perfect outliner because it has a convenient UX around all those pain points, but I find it exhausting to use over time/as the PKMS grows.

I think Trilium saves me from a lot of cognitive burden by keeping the shape of the notes collection explicit and visible at all times (via its hierarchy). Also for the record, I'm not trying to brainwash you, only describing that there is a journey into and out of outliners :-)

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#84

Post by ezst »

utilize1808 wrote: post #82
ezst wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that the notes don't organize themselves, you just offload to a non-deterministic black-box to "lose them for you". Many (although, not all, true) give their PKMS a very opinionated shape, because the way knowledge is organized and structured matters as much, if not more, than the sum of the individual facts. Personally, I'm not interested, but to each their own.

Are you more deterministic than an instruction-following black-box? I doubt it. Also, such organization practice mostly becomes a mechanical routine after the initial experimentation phase. Good riddance, I'd say.

> Are you more deterministic than an instruction-following black-box? I doubt it.

I think I am, because I want my referenced notes to be typed. And the depth and accuracy of those types defines the extent of the knowledge being keept track of, considering that it also evolves and morphs over time. If I don't care to have categories of notes that I comprehend (Persons, Projects, Vehicles, …) and curated and up-to-date properties for them, I don't even know what kind of content is there and what kind of queries/answer I can expect out of my PKMS. I want determinism on a formal, fundamental level.

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#85

Post by justusthane »

jellyroll42 wrote: post #28

No mention of a migration guide from V1 to V2, even in the "Big Update" post? What the heck

Apologies for my tardy response. I tried it and am disappointed to report that it does not, in fact, "just work", but migration is easy anyway - there's a "File to DB graph" import option. Point it at your existing Logseq folder and it sucks the content into a new graph.

I agree that the migration path should be clearly documented.

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#86

Post by jellyroll42 »

justusthane wrote: post #85
jellyroll42 wrote: post #28

No mention of a migration guide from V1 to V2, even in the "Big Update" post? What the heck

Apologies for my tardy response. I tried it and am disappointed to report that it does not, in fact, "just work", but migration is easy anyway - there's a "File to DB graph" import option. Point it at your existing Logseq folder and it sucks the content into a new graph. I agree that the migration path should be clearly documented.

Ok that sounds close enough to "just works" to me. Thanks for checking. I'll give it a try.

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#88

Post by wosk »

flkiwi wrote: post #39
wosk wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://test.logseq.com is the new version in browser, I think they plan to keep it around

Aside from not wanting to take notes on a test subdomain, it's still local to the machine. I can fire up my notes from literally anywhere, any device and see a consistent state without having to sync anything.

I think due do this comment and other, they renamed it to app.logseq.com. But your point still hold, if you don't have sync (self-hosted or by paying), it is only local.

Re: Logseq 2.0 Beta (DB version) is here

#89

Post by chrisweekly »

packetlost wrote: post #81
chrisweekly wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll stick with my portable local-filesystem markdown over any db format (let alone with Obsidian's Coreview and Dataview plugins, and Bases, for db-like querying).

And more power to you. I find the SQLite database of plain-text to be a worthwhile tradeoff to grow past the limitations of plain markdown files.

Right on. I'm glad there are options. :)
Post reply on HN