SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the where-will-they-store-the-source-code? dept.
Chris Ball, about whom I know very little, gave a talk to the Data Terra Nemo conference on 23/24 May in Berlin. From the conference site, I gathered the following: "Data Terra Nemo is a technical conference for discussing the ideas behind systems and protocols without centralized ownership and how they impact the landscape of the Internet".
Chris gave a presentation regarding a decentralized git repository which he has dubbed 'GitTorrent'. His notes, which he describes as an 'aspirational transcript' of the talk, take the story up:
Why a decentralized GitHub?
First, the practical reasons: GitHub might become untrustworthy, get hacked — or get DDOS'd by China, as happened while I was working on this project! I know GitHub seems to be doing many things right at the moment, but there often comes a point at which companies that have raised $100M in Venture Capital funding start making decisions that their users would strongly prefer them not to.
There are philosophical reasons, too: GitHub is closed source, so we can't make it better ourselves. Mako Hill has an essay called Free Software Needs Free Tools, which describes the problems with depending on proprietary software to produce free software, and I think he's right. To look at it another way: the experience of our collaboration around open source projects is currently being defined by the unmodifiable tools that GitHub has decided that we should use.
So that's the practical and philosophical, and I guess I'll call the third reason the "ironical". It is a massive irony to move from many servers running the CVS and Subversion protocols, to a single centralized server speaking the decentralized Git protocol. Google Code announced its shutdown a few months ago, and their rationale was explicitly along the lines of "everyone's using GitHub anyway, so we don't need to exist anymore". We're quickly heading towards a single central service for all of the world's source code.
So, especially at this conference, I expect you'll agree with me that this level of centralization is unwise.
The talk continues in the first link at the start of this summary.
Original Submission
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday June 02 2015, @12:30AM
Here we see yet another example of 1) good, almost omniscient design and 2) attempts to reinvent the wheel.
Git IS decentralized. Many of my repositories are kept in multiple places: GitHub, Bitbucket, my private VPS, my laptop, my USB stick, my backup HDD. There is no danger of my code being held hostage.
The "problem" is that GitHub has gobbled up all the mindshare (public awareness of brand name, size of userbase, integration with other closed-source services, and so on). This is not a problem that can be solved by making a "decentralized GitHub"; it can only be fixed by educating users to not chain themselves to a single point of failure and to exercise healthy restraint when outsourcing to proprietary entities.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!