gogoprotobuf VS git-bug

That probably won't happen either, because the Google gRPC team is also quite resistant to any kind of change (that isn't driven by internal needs at Google). Projects like GoGo Protobuf had to be developed to fill gaps that the Google team refused to fill or accept PRs for.

the gogo protobuf compiler toolchain is looking for a maintainer https://github.com/gogo/protobuf u/MehdiHK

protobuff : Google's binary data transfer protocol

Looks like Crowdstrike just pushed out publicly a replacement for gogo/proto. It looks like the library solves 2 problems:

Seems like we're pretty middle of the road. I can only guess as to why but it probably has to do with heavy usage of pointers and reflection. Gogo/protobuf solved this performance with code generation, but the go protobuf implementation has essentially eschewed it. I do wonder how the benchmark would look using the new vitess proto library for Go (which has many of the benefits of gogo but with active development and an API built on top of the Google one)

Yeah, it's a pretty thick Makefile and set of shell scripts, but it's seemingly using things like: k8s.io/code-generator/cmd/go-to-protobuf and github.com/gogo/protobuf/protoc-gen-gogo and github.com/gogo/protobuf/protoc-gen-gogofast which from what I can tell... [it looks like this can probably help me a bit in understanding how to make custom types](https://cloud.redhat.com/blog/kubernetes-deep-dive-code-generation-customresources).

repositories: # Definition depends on the 27156597fdf4fb77004434d4409154a230dc9a32 version of https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis # and defines its name as GOOGLE_APIS # It can be referenced in importPaths by $GOOGLE_APIS GOOGLE_APIS: https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis@27156597fdf4fb77004434d4409154a230dc9a32 # Definition depends on the 226206f39bd7276e88ec684ea0028c18ec2c91ae version of https://github.com/gogo/protobuf # and defines its name as GOGO_PROTOBUF # It can be referenced in the importPaths by $GOGO_PROTOBUF GOGO_PROTOBUF: https://github.com/gogo/protobuf@226206f39bd7276e88ec684ea0028c18ec2c91ae

В проекті ми використовуємо офіційну бібліотеку Protobuf github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf, яка підчас серіалізації використовує рефлексію і будує слайс байтів через append. А потім я дізнався про "Protocol Buffers for Go with Gadgets" github.com/gogo/protobuf, бібліотеку-fork яка генерує додатковий код щоб прибрати рефексію підчас серіалізації і вже записує в слайс байтів по індексу бо так швидше. Коли змінював одну бібліотеку на іншу то важливим вважав що стало працювати швидше і написані раніше тести пройшли успішно. І все б було гаразд але в проекті існувала латка яка через пару тижнів після заміни перезапустила мікросервіс через паніку:

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).