#dat

/

      • dat-gitter
        (RangerMauve) I was thinking of separating the PR/issues stuff into a separate layer with different dats. So there's just the core git integration, and the social network aspect could be built separately and different apps could still merge changes with each other
      • noffle
        RangerMauve: ooh interesting
      • sounds a bit like git-ssb's approach
      • what kinds of things does that separation let you do? could you explain diff apps merging changes /w eachother?
      • dat-gitter
        (RangerMauve) I was thinking that everyone has their own dat for their forks, then collaboration is posts on any social platform saying "hey, merge with my branch on my dat"
      • (RangerMauve) So you don't have a central git repo as the center of the collaboration
      • noffle
        aah
      • collaborate around a /set/ of git repos, kinda
      • or around many 'opinions' of a repo
      • dat-gitter
        (RangerMauve) Yeah, or even on fritter
      • (RangerMauve) Or a forum
      • (RangerMauve) You could still have a "main" repo/branch that a project can point to, but people can merge with each other more easily
      • (RangerMauve) Like, a problem with the GitHub approach is that it's all centralized around a single repo, hosting your own git server is a pain so people can't merge directly with each other anymore
      • noffle
        I've never been a part of a git project that didn't employ a central-remote setup; I don't have much perspective on what having less centralization there would look like
      • dat-gitter
        (RangerMauve) Same, honestly. 😅 But I think it'd be cool to have the option to do that.
      • noffle
        RangerMauve: I'll write this in a way that doesn't preclude it. you *could* write issues and prs to the hyperdb, but you could also compose it differently
      • dat-gitter
        (RangerMauve) I think the difference would be when you want someone you're collaborating with to try your code, instead of pushing to your central remote, you can just send them a link.
      • micahscopes has quit
      • micahscopes joined the channel
      • TheAceOfHearts joined the channel
      • micahscopes has quit
      • micahscopes joined the channel
      • ralphtheninja joined the channel
      • (julianpistorius) This might be a little premature/crazy, but one thing to consider is that people may prefer to use something other than Git. Perhaps something even _more_ decentralized than Git and more suited to a P2P world:
      • (julianpistorius)
      • (julianpistorius) http://pijul.org/
      • (julianpistorius) [full message: https://gitter.im/datproject/discussions?at=5b1...]
      • noffle
        julianpistorius: substack was hacking on a fully p2p source control called dov
      • dat-gitter
        (julianpistorius) So at the very least it might be a good idea to try to decouple the collaboration tools from the versioning system.
      • noffle
        agreed, that we can do much more p2p than git
      • dat-gitter
        (julianpistorius) 🙇🏻 🤘