Hi Christoph, On 4 November 2015 at 17:26, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote: > On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 17:26:28 +0100 Anselm R Garbe <garb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I do like the idea of having a paste recording. But I don't like the >> idea of making it mailinglist based. That sucks. You will end up using >> a mail archiver to look through your paste history? Sounds terrible to >> me. > > Well, the mail archiver could be improved. But actually, how to handle > e‐mail is on the user’s side, not the server side. This is what I think > is the difference to the web based solutions: No centralisation of the > storage. This will prevent the new Google paradigma of universal search, > but there should be more responsibility on the users side too. And we > get the mail features for free: Discussions, threads, proper MIME encod‐ > ing, mail reprocessing etc.
The decentralization aspect is a fair point, though particularly for the kind of data you are referring to "to paste" I would rather suggest to use a world-writeable git repository. With this everybody can paste->commit and all the clones are the decentralized data storage. Querying for particular data can be done via grep and even scripts could be added nicely. I still don't get the point why a mailinglist is particularly good for decentralized data storage. What if someone missed some pastes, because he subscribed late(r)? BR, Anselm
