Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 18

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 18

[Eric Wong]

Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's a great pity that https://public-inbox.org/ is just
> directory index, not a true home page.

+Cc meta@public-inbox.org

I'm not sure one could do better while staying true to the
minimalist nature of plain-text email.

In the spirit of decentralization, there may not be /a/
homepage, but many.   Everything is meant to clonable with each
public-inbox, so maybe every public-inbox will have a code
branch attached to it with the source+docs bundled.


At least for now, other pages are more easily discoverable[1]
but one day I hope to have repobrowse[2] running there (and
maybe everywhere).


For now, I am prioritizing user/admin/hacker documentation so
more instances can exist.  I'll probably get some online help
stuff up tomorrow.


[1] at least the top-level of public-inbox.org already has more
    content than both YHBT.net and bogomips.org combined :)

[2] git clone -b repobrowse https://public-inbox.org/ ...
    (idle the moment: think cgit|gitweb with the same (lack of)
     style as public-inbox, +search, +mail thread integration)

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 18

[Josh Triplett]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:30:27AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's a great pity that https://public-inbox.org/ is just
> > directory index, not a true home page.
> 
> +Cc meta@public-inbox.org
> 
> I'm not sure one could do better while staying true to the
> minimalist nature of plain-text email.
> 
> In the spirit of decentralization, there may not be /a/
> homepage, but many.   Everything is meant to clonable with each
> public-inbox, so maybe every public-inbox will have a code
> branch attached to it with the source+docs bundled.

It'd be nice if it had a prominent list of all lists available; as far
as I can tell, the main page has no link to /git/.

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 18

[Eric Wong]

Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:30:27AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> > Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > It's a great pity that https://public-inbox.org/ is just
> > > directory index, not a true home page.
> > 
> > +Cc meta@public-inbox.org
> > 
> > I'm not sure one could do better while staying true to the
> > minimalist nature of plain-text email.
> > 
> > In the spirit of decentralization, there may not be /a/
> > homepage, but many.   Everything is meant to clonable with each
> > public-inbox, so maybe every public-inbox will have a code
> > branch attached to it with the source+docs bundled.
> 
> It'd be nice if it had a prominent list of all lists available; as far
> as I can tell, the main page has no link to /git/.

I'm not sure that's necessary; most of the traffic seems to come
from /git/MESSAGE_ID/ links posted by others.  So it's
probably more inside-out exposure than anything.

As for other projects, I'm not aware of anybody else using it,
yet.  I have some small projects using it, but most of those are
one-off throwaways and I'm not comfortable promoting those along
with public-inbox.  I admit: I'm not comfortable promoting
anything I do, really.

I do wish more people would start using the .onions, though...

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 18

[Josh Triplett]

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:27:04PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:30:27AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> > > Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > It's a great pity that https://public-inbox.org/ is just
> > > > directory index, not a true home page.
> > > 
> > > +Cc meta@public-inbox.org
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure one could do better while staying true to the
> > > minimalist nature of plain-text email.
> > > 
> > > In the spirit of decentralization, there may not be /a/
> > > homepage, but many.   Everything is meant to clonable with each
> > > public-inbox, so maybe every public-inbox will have a code
> > > branch attached to it with the source+docs bundled.
> > 
> > It'd be nice if it had a prominent list of all lists available; as far
> > as I can tell, the main page has no link to /git/.
> 
> I'm not sure that's necessary; most of the traffic seems to come
> from /git/MESSAGE_ID/ links posted by others.  So it's
> probably more inside-out exposure than anything.

If someone hears about public-inbox, it's nice to know what other lists
they can use it for.

> As for other projects, I'm not aware of anybody else using it,
> yet.  I have some small projects using it, but most of those are
> one-off throwaways and I'm not comfortable promoting those along
> with public-inbox.  I admit: I'm not comfortable promoting
> anything I do, really.

Please take this as encouragement to do so.  I'd love to see the
public-inbox equivalent to the main page of https://lists.debian.org/ ,
as an example.  (And I'd love to have public-inbox archives of Debian
mailing lists.)

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 18

[Eric Wong]

Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:27:04PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> > As for other projects, I'm not aware of anybody else using it,
> > yet.  I have some small projects using it, but most of those are
> > one-off throwaways and I'm not comfortable promoting those along
> > with public-inbox.  I admit: I'm not comfortable promoting
> > anything I do, really.
> 
> Please take this as encouragement to do so.  I'd love to see the
> public-inbox equivalent to the main page of https://lists.debian.org/ ,
> as an example.  (And I'd love to have public-inbox archives of Debian
> mailing lists.)

Just pushed out some POD (which should build to manpages),
so maybe early adopters can start hosting mirrors themselves(*).

   https://public-inbox.org/meta/20160907004907.1479-1-e@80x24.org/

I hope public-inbox-overview(7) is a good starting point
(along with the existing INSTALL) and there'll be more docs
coming at some point...


Writing documentation tends to make my attention span drift all
over the place; so maybe parts don't make sense or were glossed
over, but I'll be glad to help clarify anything.  (Responding
to emails is generally easier for me since I can answer things
specifically, tough to do for generic docs)


I'll try to get a tarball release out soonish,
but my schedule is unpredictable.


(*) None of the code has had any security audit, yet;
    and there's no warranty of course.