On Sun, 31 May 2015 21:09:25 +0800 Ivan Tham <ivanthamjun...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Ivan, > I think that would make the projects in suckless more decentralized. > I am just giving and idea but I still think the current system is > better, using gittorrent may let the projects which are inspired by > suckless work together in the suckless community. What do you think? GitHub is a deadly cancer infesting the very tissue of what makes up quality software development. GitTorrent though is not affiliated with it, and apart from the worries how to support "pull requests" and other bullcrap, it's just a fundamental idea based on vanilla git. Now, regarding GitTorrent: Decentralizing is cool, but it's just too complex to handle for most people. I've been into this area for some time now, but I'm still not able to explain blockchains to a newbie, which indicates that I'm still not intuitively handling this topic. Same applies here: A central point, a server, can be a weak spot and for large datasets, going decentral is very cool! In the end though, same as with torrents (I only torrent the Debian Live CDs/DVDs and other non copyright stuff of course (;), if a torrent is not seeded, it will die. Nowadays, if you want to keep a torrent service running as ideally as on the paper (namely, people seeding back to a ratio of >1) you have to force them into it by punishing those who just leech. In the end, torrents which nobody downloads are less likely to be seeded. And looking at suckless, we have numerous git-repos which just are not that popular to begin with. The big problem I see is authentication, which has already been discussed in the article. Using and developing blockchains is not easy and this leads to errors which I'm personally not keen on handling. Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
