upvote

points

by 99990000099922 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby icy22 hours ago|
next
[-]
The cool thing is you can just host your own knot then. Host repos of whatever size you want.
reply
upvoteby cedws20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Man I really want to like this thing but this jargon is so stupid.
reply
upvoteby OneDeuxTriSeiGo20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The jargon is just naming the free-standing components after rope/string related things. i.e. tangle, knot, spindle, etc.
reply
upvoteby tardedmeme17 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Just call them what they are. Federations/networks, servers, repositories...
reply
upvoteby OneDeuxTriSeiGo11 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You got pretty much none of the names right.

Tangle: the appview server of the tangled network.

Knot: the git server that holds an arbitrary quantity of git repos.

Spindle: CI servers/runners/nodes.

Each one is the name of a component and the name for those components is pretty arbitrary.

reply
upvoteby fgfarben19 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I think they're mad because 'knot' is a furry fetish term.
reply
upvoteby sakjur10 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Pretty much every word in English seems to have an innuendo meaning to someone, do anyone truly care past the age of 15?

I find Tangled's language a bit annoying because I'm pretty sure if this caught on it's even more single word concept rather needlessly. If the protocol is called Knot, then call a server a Knot instance or Knot server. If the runner protocol is called Spindle, each server which responds to that could be a Spindle runner. That'll serve two functions: It'll let people contextually hook the terms up against existing terms and still retain the option of evolving into singular word concepts if they prove successful enough for that to happen.

From my point of view as a non-native speaker, the frequent overloading of commonplace words add to the confusion of learning English. I don't like that. It's far from a big hurdle, but just big enough to earn a soft little sigh from me.

Your comment was the only thing that made me even care to comment: Isn't it rather unlikely that the person you're commenting on takes issue with a kink rather than any other reason why "knot" and "spindle" might be poor choices? Who knows, they might even have a good reason, but you started out with assuming bad faith and at least I tend to just leave conversations at that point.

reply
upvoteby sambuccid21 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Similar UI but donation based and public repo only: codeberg.org

Fixed low cost but different UI: sourcehut.org

reply
upvoteby 99990000099921 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Source Hut looks cool, the website is confusing though. What build systems do I get for 4$ a month ?

Getting my friends to feel comfortable moving ( so they can view the UX ) too will be a challenge.

reply
upvoteby sambuccid1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I like their build system, is very simple to use, based on shell scrips, and has some neat features, like ssh-ing into the machine that had a failed build, or spinning a build with a custom manifest file (useful when you need to iterate quickly).

Although it doesn't have all the "plugins" and other stuff that CI tools have today, it provides fairly "standard" points of integration

For more info: https://man.sr.ht/builds.sr.ht/

I agree the website is a bit confusing at first, but after spending a couple of hours on it you can easily see how it's organised, for example to display branches and files it uses the more basic git terminology (e.g. main branch -> tree, list of commits -> log, branches and tags -> refs)

reply