the single most important criteria when replacing Github
https://joeyh.name/blog/entry/the_single_most_important_criteria_when_replacing_Github/
Consider all the data that's used to provide the value-added features on top of git. Issue tracking, wikis, notes in commits, lists of forks, pull requests, access controls, hooks, other configuration, etc.
Is that data stored in a git repository?
@joeyh how do you feel about activitypub as an interoperability mechanism instead?
@technomancy like I say in the blog post, it neglects an pportunity.
Unless activitypub gets as much distributed power as git has.
(But, consuming data from a git repository and communicating it over activitypub would be fine.)
@joeyh I'm skeptical; I've seen many, many attempts to move issues into git as the backing data store, and no one has yet found a way to make it work in a way that's satisfactory.
@technomancy no, *dozens* of people have found *different* ways, all non-interoperable. Which is why a github or a gitlab doing this and establishing a de-facto standard would be valuable.
(I have been active in the dist-bugs space for a decade or so.)
@joeyh interesting, so from your perspective the thing that's kept issues-in-git from catching on is the https://xkcd.com/927/ problem?
@technomancy yes, 100%
@joeyh is there anywhere I can read about the setup you've found that has worked for your projects?
@technomancy it's a MVP: Simply markdown files stored next to the code, rendered and editable on a wiki and accepting anonymous git pushes that edit only the markdown files. Far from ideal, but it does not stop users from giving more feedback than I can keep up with.
