this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
363 points (99.7% liked)

Open Source

30750 readers
851 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

At this point I'm very concerned about the open source industry relying so much on github. You have to remember that any project there can be swept away overnight because it doesn't fit into the agenca of a large company, for example.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Git itself isn't decentralized is about people copying it and sometimes mirroring it.

Anyway it is a good habit to avoid github entirely (when hosting a repo).

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Git itself isn't decentralized is about people copying it and sometimes mirroring it.

Not sure what you mean. My understanding is that git itself is decentralized insofar as each clone can develop its own history without ever needing to push to the origin, but that what OP is referring to is actually the “distributed” nature of git, where i.e. it’s easy to copy the entire history of an instance.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

what OP is referring to is actually the “distributed” nature of git, where i.e. it’s easy to copy the entire history of an instance.

Exactly. Isn't decentralized itself since it's not a platform but by being "indipendent" and not entangled with anything you can just copy it entirely and host it somewhere else.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Isn't decentralized itself since it's not a platform

I think I see your definition of “decentralized” a little better now, if you only want to apply it to platforms.

I think your definition may be too strict, and that “decentralized” and “distributed don’t have to be mutually exclusive, but eh, that’s just my take.

[–] refalo 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I think if syncing of (at least) upstream histories between clones was done automatically, they might consider that more in-line with their definition of decentralized.

Also kudos to both of you for communicating your differences properly without resorting to arguments.

I feel like so much of the arguing and trolling nowadays is simply due to a difference in subjective definitions and people not being able to calmly communicate that with each other.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

100% agree, when I see something I disagree with on its face I try to default to “I probably don’t get something they’re saying, given that it’s only a couple sentences of written word, and a different person’s brain who wrote them”.

It always makes for more useful conversation than defaulting to “ha what a dumbass”

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Anyway it is a good habit to avoid github entirely ~~(when hosting a repo)~~.

FIFY

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yes but no, because I don't want to not interact with a repo at all just because it's on github for whatever reason (if there's one).

But yes, I understand your feelings. Fuck M$

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Git is decentralised by nature. It's what allows mirroring the repo on other forges even when git repos are hosted on proprietary platforms like GitHub.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You can easily mirror GitHub to some other repo

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yup. I've done it myself when I switched to Gitlab. It's really straightforward.