Follow

Well I have my server setup with SSL and all that good stuff. Most of the hassle was dealing with cgi support (which I haven't touched since before the year 2000) and your basic unix permissions, etc.

I still want to come up with a more convinient way of setting up new repositories, but that can wait. For now it's good enough to work with for awhile and see if I can switch over from &

Working on a blog post as well...

@jjg One nice thing about git and hg is that they are relatively easy to set up remote servers with ssh if all you want is replication. Does fossil support simple setups like that?

@cstanhope I think it does, but I didn't look into that because I wanted the web UI for the wiki, tickets, etc.

@jjg Yeah, that makes sense. That's the power of fossil anyway, so may as well use it.

@cstanhope For me those features are key to getting away from the proprietary "value-add" of Github, Gitlab, etc.

But yeah if I didn't need that Git+ssh remotes would be way easier.

@jjg You're reminding me why I got into fossil the first time. I only moved away from it as I wanted to practice using git. (I wasn't using git at my work at the time.) It's very strange to me that the ideas of fossil haven't been applied to git and hg. But perhaps the "value-add" services were "good enough".

@cstanhope

I think for most of the world Github *is* Git (unfortunately). At least most of the developers I encounter IRL don't understand that there is a way to use Git outside of the Github website.

I wish had a "federated" mode that didn't use centralized servers. I think it might be easier with fossil because it already provides a "local mode" web UI, so you just need a background protocol to synchronize the repositories between collaborating hosts... 🤔

@jjg That's a good point about the confusion between git and Github. There's also a subset of developers that want everything to be on Github so they can fluff up their profile with all their activity. Anyway...

It really would be interesting to extend fossil in ways that allow synchronizing repositories without needing a centralized web presence.

@cstanhope fwiw it might already do it but I'm such a noob I overlooked it 😂

@jjg I started thinking about Fossil earlier but then ended up looking at Pijul. It might be too early to put that into production, but I like the look of it.

for most personal-documents stuff I have been migrating over to SyncThing which supports a few different versioning modes. I sync to a machine that automatically does the backups, so there's some redundancy.

@Triplefox

Syncthing is pretty great, I use it for my "piles of files" sort of stuff :)

I haven't seen Pijul but I'll check it out, thanks for the tip!

@jjg @Triplefox The one thing that has kept my from Syncthing is the ability to share docs. How do you all share files with others?

@sikkdays @Triplefox

I don't have a good answer for that. I've setup special shared folders to collaborate with other Syncthing users, but getting people to use Syncthing just to share stuff with me can be difficult.

@jjg Yes. I found they as well for one of the podcasts I do. I actually have a friend @cuibonobo who wanted to build a way to do it. I think she got too busy with other things.

I'm happy with my Nextcloud as we've discussed before. I was just curious if things had changed since I used SyncThing last.

@sikkdays @Triplefox

Once upon a time (when I was using bittorrent's closed-source syncthing equiv.) I wrote a little web app that worked like a "gateway" to access files synced to directories on the webserver.

The idea was, if you couldn't be bothered to install the "sync thing", you could get access to the files in a browser.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.coop

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!