← Back to context

Comment by dannyfritz07

15 hours ago

I have had my eye on these technologies for a while. Embedding the issue tracker and such in your git repo. Every day these make more and more sense.

- https://gitsocial.org/

- https://radicle.dev/

- https://github.com/git-bug/git-bug

6 comments

dannyfritz07

Reply
BTBurke  11 hours ago

I made the decision to leave Github a couple months ago when I retired and started heavily working on personal projects. I like the idea of radicle and used it for a while, but it's complicated to set up and maintain if you want to run your own seed node and pin your personal projects.

What I ended up with is a version of a static forge - Charm's soft-serve to host the repos and a forked version of the pico.sh pgit static site generator. I added git-bug integration to track issues in the repo and an alternative CLI to git-bug that works better when collaborating with agents.

A static forge site is very resilient to bot traffic because it only renders a limited number of commits, instead of pathologically allowing a near infinite number of URLs for bots to crawl.

https://kilimanjaro.io if you want to see what it looks like.

  • sunshine-o  2 hours ago

    I would agree with everything you say, but why not both?

    We are actually facing 2 distinct problems:

    - Github is a centralized, controlled git hosting, identity, collaboration platform.

    - Bots are attacking any public facing interface.

    So maybe the solution is:

    - to keep a Radicle node private/behind fences to lower the maintenance/security burden, with eventually access to selected collaborators.

    - publish the repos with a static site generator like pgit

jbaber  12 hours ago

Exactly this. Even though I don't use git-bug anymore, I'm still a sponsor. I desperately want an issue-tracker-in-.git to become a standard.

Issues and CI are the only lock-in. The latter is legitimate because you're using someone else's CPU, but every developer has the tooling to "git diff" and write comments if we could just agree on a format.

  • dannyfritz07  9 hours ago

    I have trouble wrapping my head around how to make it so the public can create an issue in your git repo.

    • Hendrikto  4 hours ago

      They can clone the repo, make changes, and then push. On the server, you can have a hook that checks if the commit only contains appropriate issue changes, and apply just those.

      Sure, a little more complicated than “Create Issue”, but not that much for devs. We could even simplify the workflow with e.g. git-issue or something like that, similar to e.g. git-send-email.

          git issue init “There is a problem”
    git issue push
    git issue get 6 # short for issue@{6}