git-bug VS ossdatabase

Unfortunately github appears to be actively breaking the ability to use git-bug on large repositories (like nixpkgs):

https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/issues/749#issuecomme...

True but getting less true by the day:

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

https://www.fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki

Only not having access to https://todo.sr.ht made me to recognize fully, that I don’t have any access to it. https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug suddenly looks much more interesting.

Neither do the issues support. But there is git-bug [0].

[0]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

As a sort of spiritual successor to git-appraise, I've been working on git-bug[1] which support issues and will at some point support kanban and code review. There is a few notables improvements:

- CRDT-like reusable data structure [2][3] for true p2p workflow and easily create new entities (code review ...)

- bidirectional bridges to github, gitlab ... to ease the transition or just use git-bug as a complement of those platform

- CLI, terminal UI and web UI, for different taste and integrate into your tooling/workflow

[1]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

[2]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/doc/model...

[3]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/entity/da...

> but that is for the development of the platform and network of Gitopia. For the end user the workflows remain almost the same for collaboration.

I have to disagree here. Accidental complexity in a system can have severe downstream impacts on end users, whether that be in the form of poor performance, unreliability, or just slow update cycles. It's not something you can paper over and completely hide from the user.

> Along with this the blockchain layer layer offers immutable, transparent and tamper proof versioning of code

Tamper-proof can be accomplished natively by signing [0]. receive.denyNonFastForwards and receive.denyDeletes[1] can be used to make a git repository immutable. Git commits are also already content-addressable. And transparency is achieved by just having the repo available for people to clone.

> along with the collaboration meta and augments the current collaboration flow

Could this augmentation not be accomplished by storing the collaboration information in the repo under a set of special-purpose branches? Like git-bug[2] or git-issue[3]? Coupled with GPG signatures and you've got your immutability, too!

> Along with this it enables us to provide a novel means to incentivize open-source contributions along with fostering a more decentralized approach for governance (even for projects), every token holder could have a say in the decision making, reducing the risk of undue influence by a single party, hence eliminating centralized control.

This one I'll grant you, but it's by far the least compelling aspect of the project to me. I don't think we're going to solve the centralization of GitHub by centralizing on a new plutocracy, I'd much rather see efforts towards full decentralization. There's nothing inherent to Git that requires that we all use the same set of servers.

[0] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Signing-Your-Work

[1] https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Customizing-Git-Git-Configura...

[2] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

[3] https://github.com/dspinellis/git-issue

Regarding the issues, there are some projects like git-bug https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug trying to embed these sorts of meta-work into git.

Probably git-bug is closer to what Fossil does: It uses Git as a storage engine, and can coexist with your code in the same physical repository, but the issues don't actually show up as source files. Instead, each issue is a special branch (buried in refs so it won't clutter up git branch) that has zero common ancestry with anything else. So in theory you can poke at it with Git, but really, the Git under the hood is mostly an implementation detail, and as long as you interact with those files through the tool, it guarantees you won't have merge conflicts.

You might be interested by git-bug and https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/doc/model..., which seems to be exactly what you describe. (Disclaimer: author).

looks like they typo'd, it's https://ossdatabase.com

- https://ossdatabase.com : Open source alternatives for popular software, this project itself is Open Source. (https://github.com/prithvi16/ossdatabase) and extensively uses Hotwire.

I have built and launched multiple products from ideation and design to building and marketing them. I have also worked in large and small teams. I like to take ownership of my work end to end and figure things out on my own.

https://ossdatabase.com - is a crowdsourced Open Source software database. Our goal is to make finding open source alternatives and comparing them to proprietary solutions as simple as possible.

I have also built something similar at

https://ossdatabase.com

Recently released code under AGPL-3.

But I want to go beyond aggregation and add following things

I will add your project to https://ossdatabase.com

Sure. Some links I just bookmarked and will use:

https://highbrow.se/ (Alternative search engine)

https://cora-pic.com/en (Meme generator)

https://www.mightyapp.com/ (New upcoming cloud browser)

https://ossdatabase.com/ (Database of OSS)

Hi! I am the creator of this tool. I saw people collecting Open Source alternatives on Github. Which is awesome btw, but I thought there was a better way to do this. I wanted to build a nice and clean UI and nice filters to filter projects by tech, platform, use case, and license. Following things are planned - User reviews for projects, will be screened for spam.- User-based submissions, and edits for projects. More transparency in moderation.- Karma for users based on edits. - Once I gain enough traction I plan to release the source code under MIT and the collected data in CSV files for everyone to download. - A job board for companies using Open Source tools for monetization. Alternative.to is a good tool, but it doesn't hurt to have alternatives ;). Thanks, u/zicxor for cross-posting here! source code: https://github.com/prithvi16/ossdatabase