No fediverse IDs on the ReadMe page on this repo about forgefed HOT 14 OPEN

there is an email address on the README - that is an ID on the email fediverse

from forgefed.

from forgefed.

Email is indeed federated, but it's not part of the fediverse as the term is commonly used. I assumed that because you were working on an ActivityPub based spec, you would be familiar with 'fediverse' as a unifying term referring to the network of sites that support federation using either OStatus or ActivityPub. My apologies for not being more specific. If it would be helpful for me to resent those links to the email address on the ReadMe page (without joining that email list at this time), I'm happy to do that. Just let me know :)

from forgefed.

from forgefed.

i did not say that no one in the group used those things - i think the majority of people in the group do - i was only saying that this group does not have it's own infrastructure - there has been discussion about that but it does not exist yet - is it not the entire point of federation to be self-sufficient and not to rely on third party services? to do so would be an invitation for the obvious criticism: "why isnt this group dog-fooding?"

from forgefed.

from forgefed.

but what benefit would it be to splinter the conversation across multiple venues? the discussion is happening already among the members - most of the discussion is in the past actually and the real work has begun

anyone may send a message to the group - and this github repo is for discussions among the wider community - adding any additional channels now would only dilute the conversation

from forgefed.

anyone may send a message to the group

That is actually not true - the list is moderated to members only, for writing. Anyone can however participate here on the github issues. I agree about not splintering discussion too much.

from forgefed.

it is monitored but not restricted - koala put the email address on the readme so that non-members could write in - he is monitoring it but he would pass anything that is useful

from forgefed.

If someone decides what goes through, it's the same thing :) I'm not arguing here, I'm just saying it's not an open list.

from forgefed.

someone has to do that filtering or else it is inviting spambots - as soon as the fediverse becomes populous enough they will feel the wrath of the spambots too

i think that if this group gets its own infrastructure, that it could run it's own messaging platform to replace this github discussion and possibly the mailing list too; but for now, this github repo is fully open to all github users and koala and several others are reading everything here too

from forgefed.

@strypey If you want, you may find me on https://mastodon.hk/@yookoala. But since this is supposed to be a group work, I am by no means the "official contact point". It is much preferable to have your comment created as an issue in this issue tracker.

from forgefed.

@yookoala sure, as per the rest of the comment thread, a point of contact is about feeding potentially helpful info that comes up in fediverse discussions into the GitPub working group process, not moving GP discussions into the fediverse. See the links in the OP for one such discussion.

from forgefed.

I have asked Drew to write up a blog post explaining why he feels that the email protocols are more suitable than the AP protocols for federating code forges.

Just for the sake of completeness, since this was discussed here, here's Drew's blog piece on the potential of using Git over email as the transport for web-based code forges:
https://drewdevault.com/2018/07/23/Git-is-already-distributed.html

... and a resulting discussion on Lobste.rs:
https://lobste.rs/s/h1udkf/git_is_already_federated_decentralized

from forgefed.