Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the main issue with git-bug is that they are not dogfooding it. However , it's also one of the few projects that is actually trying to solve the core problem, rather than skirting around it. (well I now learned of radicle in this thread and they seem to store issues in git and even have PR support I think)
> For me the main issue with git-bug is that they are not dogfooding it. This is incorrect. $ git remote get-url origin ssh://git@github.com/git-bug/git-bug.git $ for n in bugs identities; do echo "${n} on the remote: " $(git ls-remote origin "refs/${n}/\*" | wc -l); done bugs on the remote: 453 identities on the remote: 311 See the related issue for more info: https://github.com/git-bug/git-bug/issues/1221#issuecomm…
I didn't know git-bug doesn't support PRs yet. I think pull requests should be modeled as a kind of issue. It's an issue with some metadata that points to a commit (and besides the usual issue operations like add new comment or edit a comment, you also have the operation of editing the commit associated with the PR)
If git-bug gains suppport for Github discussions, it should also be able to import discussions from other places like a discourse forum. I think it would be kinda neat for projects that want to be self contained
> I've also been in talks with the Radicle team about possible collaboration.
This is awesome!!