@ben @sungo

The solution is mercurial or Fossil

I understand that Fossil has tickets and pull request

@catonano @sungo

Fossil looks interesting!

I haven't used either fossil or mercurial...

Git is everywhere now though. Makes it hard to use anything else. Is git itself the problem ? Or is it the fact that GitHub has become the defacto host?

@ben @sungo

this question is addressed (to some extent) in the second post of this thread

@catonano @ben And another one is coming :) Trying to respond to everyone now that i'm awake again. (Hitting send just before bed is problematic)

@sungo @catonano

Ahh the barrier to non-experts. I see what you mean. Git certainly is an overly complicated mess.

@ben @sungo

yes I really can relate to that argument

I use git, I use patches sent as attachments on mailing lists, I rebase, I cherrypick

But it's all way too much

@catonano @sungo

There's no right way to do it either. Every project has a different setup and standards for merge/pull requests.

Sidenote: why does GitHub call them pull requests!?!?

@ben @sungo

my main pain point right now is that if I push a rebased branch on a remote repo I don't know how to clean up the mess that will ensue

And I don't want to learn

I'd rather use a backup solution on patch files

@catonano @sungo

Force push :(

@notclacke @sungo @catonano oooooo huh

alrighty then. makes more sense now!

@ben @catonano @sungo

I find a small bit of pleasure in being a contrarian when it comes to software. that said, there is a git front end to hg, the mercurial client, so you can interact with both (somewhat) seamlessly.

@ben @catonano @sungo My understanding is that Fossil can work as a Git server, if anyone insists on using Git.

@alcinnz @catonano @sungo

just compiled fossil. trying it out now :)

@ben @catonano @sungo Not OP, but git itself is the problem - to do things that are a course of normal operation, you have to be an expert in git. That's not feasible for many people - people who should be able to use version control. So, they "need" to use an interface to do things which frankly shouldn't need one.

@emsenn @ben @catonano Yeah, that's what I was ranting about in the rest of the thread :)

@sungo @ben @catonano So I see - I followed from a boost so got shown things out of order. Or read them out of order.

@emsenn @ben @catonano Yup. It's all good. I mostly point at it to save myself from ranting about it again :)

@ben
Mirror all opensource git repos to IPFS then use IPFS as the git URL?
@sungo

@slashzero @sungo

oof that sounds like a lot of work

@ben @sungo and that's why everyone is on GitHub ;)

@slashzero @sungo

Yep... It's easy and everything is already there.

What about gitlab? They're open source!

@ben @sungo Apparently it already works. https://ipfs.io/docs/examples/example-viewer/example#../git/readme.md

@sungo @ben I'll just throw it onto the pile of projects I want to do someday... https://lgbt.io/media/i0hl6HckQdbHti_b0zw

@slashzero @sungo

Ha, yes the ever-lengthening list!

@ben @sungo Imagine if github.com went under, all those golang projects with imports such as "github.com/go-kit/kit/endpoint" would no longer compile.

@slashzero @ben I was just saying that I need to refrain from ranting about that. But it's difficult.

@sungo @slashzero

Lol yeah its hard!

@slashzero @sungo

Those are some *ugly* URLs lol.

I haven't found a compelling use case for ipfs yet...

@ben @sungo yeah, the ugly URLs are why I have "Look into how to deploy a git repo to IPFS under a static human usable name.

OSS projects would likely have to register a domain to point to an IPNS entry.

So let's say I have a domain`slashzero.name` I'd point `git.slashzero.name` to the IPNS entry. then someone would `git clone https://git.slashzero.name/events-rs`

theoretically, we don't even need IPFS to federate projects, just DNS and a HTTPS server.

@slashzero @ben "just"

@sungo @ben It isn't that hard to point a domain to a host. I just pointed git.slashzero.name to github's ip and was able to clone my repo: https://lgbt.io/media/DskPQ3PAoDCdRivjLR0

@slashzero @sungo

And that works with ipfs addresses too?

@notclacke @sungo @slashzero

hmm that could be a nice stopgap between current DNS and ipfs

@notclacke @ben @slashzero Y'all mind untagging me? :)

@ben @sungo With a domain I control, I can point it to somewhere else if my host (in this case github.com) goes away.

That's how Assembly Four was able to fix the censorship of Switter. https://assemblyfour.com/switter/cloudflare-fosta-sesta

Fortunately for them Cloud Flare just deleted their DNS entry to block them.

@sungo @ben Fortunately the web and Internet is built on a decentralized foundation despite the fact we rely on centralized services on top of that foundation.

@slashzero @ben The internet is owned by a few large corporations who can afford to maintain the wires. The web is increasingly centralized too. It's all very depressing.

@sungo @slashzero

unfortunately so :/

@ben @sungo What needs to happen is a federation of git instances like Mastodon and constant domains to those servers.

Smaller projects could use their instance's URL. So https://git.social.coop/slashzero/rs-events could be a gitlab instance for the social.coop community.

Big projects should buy their own domain and CNAME it. https://git.labstack.com/echo would be aliased to https://git.social.coop/labstack/echo

If git.social.coop kills their git hosting, labstack would point the domain at a new instance and forget about it

@slashzero @sungo

i think there would need to be some kind of persistence for those domain records. it's the same problem of having a dependency from github and them being down.

@ben @sungo Hmm? What do you mean by that? DNS is already a distributed system. If my domain server host vanishes, I can move my domain somewhere else.

If my git host vanishes, I can point the domain somewhere else.

For public instances like my git.social.coop example. Small projects make the trade-off of ease of use vs a static project URL. If that instance vanishes, we're still breaking all dependents.

It breaks some projects and not nearly all projects like github.com vanishing.

@slashzero @sungo

that's true. i'm just concerned about renaming and moving things around.

@slashzero @sungo

sounds about right. having control of the domains and dns zones is super important.

@MatejLach I took a look, and ActivityPub would work for this. Pull requests are straightforward: SCM url / branch / revision and some text, with notes replying to it (can add a file/line for specific feedback). Issues are easy. Forking is trivial, though most of it isn't covered by ActivityPub.