It is getting tight
holy crap … they really try to take the fun out of everything …
I like their tag line too. “Simple, distributed, fast. Pick any three”
This is an opportunity = yet another push in favour of SAFE and similar efforts. See:
In the short term I’m working on a virtual drive for SAFE which would give a crude alternative: mount your SAFE storage locally and use that as a shared repo. I understand that this approach is supported by git for collaborative working, because it is designed to work via a shared network drive (although I’ve never tried it myself).
I’m not sure how well that would work for serious stuff, but for individuals and small groups it may be OK.
Alternatively we could implement the git http protocol. I did look at that but it seems more complex than FUSE (at least to research) and think a virtual drive is more useful all round. Still, git http is relatively easy compared to a github replacement.
What we really want is github/gitlab or similar on SAFE, but that’s a significant project and beyond me.
Safe-based code collaboration could serve as a fundamental component in @dirvine’s vision of having Safe be autonomously controlled, developed, and upgraded. Opening the component to other software projects could end up being a “killer app” attracting devs to Safe.
There is no need to make it a component of the SAFE protocol (network). It is an APP level concept and anyone who creates the APP will have the Killer App for programmers.
We should at least open source in a few places like say bitbucket too, shouldn’t be too difficult to auto-port the repository
SAFE micropayments for code contributions. OSS development on steroids.
I agree, that’s why I didn’t say nor imply that.
I misinterpreted this then. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
What I was referring to in
Indeed. Now, that being said, the main issue right now is that MS is buying github.
I will move the few code that I am culpript of, not sure where yet, and will close my GH account. First because I do not trust a single word from MS, and second to add my tiny drop to the contestation stream, for what it is worth. I will certainly not accept my tiny drop to be used to “opensourcewash” the company that deployed windows worldwide.
Now what really matters, is what will be Maidsafe’s position on this ? MS acquisition means they will host the SAFE code, with all future possible implications if they wish to change how they run Github.
Countless libraries and frameworks will now be under MS hands, including Electron and a huge amount of Rust crates and Node modules.
I suppose it is a bit early, and that it has to be a PR nightmare, but I would very much like to know what the plans are @maidsafe.
Also, what is your position if you are a non Maidsafe employee, Safe apps/ libraries developer ?
I support your decision but while I’m also unhappy with this, it doesn’t change much for me personally as I was already unhappy using github for precisely this reason.
So until there is an alternative that lets me contribute to SAFE Network at least as well, I’ll probably focus my efforts on advocating that alternative and helping SAFE Network become that alternative. That said, things are in flux right now, so my view may change.
For those reasons I hope @MaidSafe remain focused on getting SAFE done first, and then looking at this rather than letting it distract them. It poses no imminent threat - the deal will probably not be done until the end of the year (according to Microsoft) so little can change until then at least.
Yes, I also think this is the best thing to do. Migrating to another platform would take time and ressources and could delay launch.
On the other hand, maybe it would be a good time for projects like Maidsafe to prepare an emergency exit by cloning their code on another platform, or their own, so that if things really become bad at some point, they are not taken in panic at last moment.
Hopefully it will not be necessary and the code self hosts on the Safe network
Read this. Already done
thank you, I had missed this one.