@ekaitz_zarraga @mayel @aral
thanks for this! I share the concern. But we need to federate the social side of github.
have you tried git.coop?

@ntnsndr

Not yet, looks like I'd have to join as a member first. It seems like simply a gitlab install (like framagit)

@aral @ekaitz_zarraga

@mayel git.coop don't seem to specify if members must be individuals. Could social.coop become a git.coop member?
It seems a little bit expensive for solo indie Free Software devs. (In pounds!)

@ekaitz_zarraga @aral @ntnsndr

@h

Yes they accept individual and org memberships (though suggested contribution for the later is about 10x more IIRC). Also wasn't clear of it's monthly, yearly or one time membership fees.

@ntnsndr @aral @ekaitz_zarraga

@h
Interesting idea -- tho I wonder if that would be better than just our own gitlab. That said, I suspect it would get resource intensive, based on some past experience with self deployed gitlab

@mayel @ekaitz_zarraga @aral @ntnsndr

@ntnsndr The cost of our own gitlab is --again, I stress--
an awful lot of badly or hardly ever compensated work by faithful, dedicated, and excellent guys who never complainabout their work overload. But I'm not bound by their modesty. @aral @ekaitz_zarraga @mayel

@mayel @ekaitz_zarraga @aral @ntnsndr I think social.coop should really decide once and for all what services it wants to provide and what's its core mission. What it wa ts to be and how. I read every day things like it should be a chat, it should host wordpress, it should host git... but it's extremely unrealistic to desire all that without compensaring IT people.

@h

There's a survey almost ready to go out to the membership and get consensus on what services we want social.coop to have. Also a proposal by @mattcropp on Loomio to begin some labor compensation.

@ntnsndr @aral @ekaitz_zarraga

@mayel Fingers crossed.
@ntnsndr @mattcropp

@mayel @ekaitz_zarraga @aral @ntnsndr @mattcropp @h I can't wait to take that survey!

@h @aral @ekaitz_zarraga @mayel
Agreed. And note that I've been advocating developer compensation from day one.

@ntnsndr Oh I know, of course, that's only fitting. I just begin to get a little impatient after six months or so 😃 @mayel

@ntnsndr @aral @mayel @ekaitz_zarraga

Any resources/ideas around federation of the social side of github? Tiny bit of discussion at indieweb (right at the bottom here: https://indieweb.org/code) but not come across much else.

@neil @ntnsndr @mayel @ekaitz_zarraga The Secure Scuttlebutt (ssb) folks have decentralised git remotes up and running. (Requires running something like Patchwork on your local device.)

@aral @neil @mayel @ekaitz_zarraga
Ah, makes sense.

@aral @neil @ntnsndr @ekaitz_zarraga

I'm gonna look into setting one up.

@aral @ntnsndr @mayel @ekaitz_zarraga

What do we mean by decentralised git remotes? Might be missing something, but in my mind it's not setting up git remotes that's an issue, more the easy forking, pull requests, discussion on issues, that kind of thing, right? git remotes can already be decentralised, kind of the raison d'etre of a DVCS, I can set one up on any server. But github has locked people in with their 'value adds' and network effort, classic anti-disintermediation.

@neil @ekaitz_zarraga @ntnsndr @aral

Yes it's nice to have distributed git remotes, but what's really needed is federation for all that extra stuff. Maybe could be done on top of ActivityPub? :/

@mayel

The git-ssb includes a web interface, that can be exposed on the local machine.

You can see it in action at http://git-ssb.celehner.com

@aral @ntnsndr @ekaitz_zarraga @neil

@alanz

A-ha, thanks! Very cool. So with this it looks like pull requests, issues, etc are also decentralized, nice. I'd like to investigate more the underlying mechanism for that - wondering if it is git-ssb platform specific, or it's based on a reusable protocol? I like @mayel's idea of some kind of standard based distribution, so the platform itself doesn't matter, as long as it implements the standard.

@ekaitz_zarraga @ntnsndr @aral @mayel