[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [fossil-users] [OT] Who's interested in projec

From: Mark Holmquist
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [fossil-users] [OT] Who's interested in project management & collaboration tools? And...
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:19:35 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120731 Thunderbird/15.0

On 08/06/2012 05:05 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
That's sort of the mental model, with a few nits:

- looking at Fossil - which incorporates distributed wiki and bug
tracking with a git-like distributed version control system

Great plan. You could almost just git-track an instance of TiddlyWiki and call it a day.

- looking at a publish-subscribe, multi-cast protocol - to avoid nodes
having to do peer-wise pushes or pulls (actually, NNTP would be perfect
- with crypto for access controls)

Yeah, pub-sub is a lot more complicated, especially with P2P, since it would involve opening ports and so on. I mean, it's possible.

- think "git as a JavaScript library, embedded in the replicated document"

Sounds like "distributed Etherpad Lite". Have you looked at that, and thought about simply making it distributed somehow?

By the way... since the link managed to get dropped:

Eugh, "open software". It's like people just post to this list for publicity, no regard for what we're trying to do.'re an evil genius, that's the only explanation.

Supported by the fact that your beta/alpha users (and release users? must be a typo?) will only have access to the source code if they pay you extra. That's not how free software works, I'm sorry to break it to you.

Mark Holmquist
Contractor, Wikimedia Foundation

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]