389 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2022
  2. www.bookstackapp.com www.bookstackapp.com
    1. https://www.bookstackapp.com/

      mentioned by Jim Groom as one of the most popular wiki software available on Github

      BookStack is a simple, self-hosted, easy-to-use platform for organising and storing information

    1. https://twinery.org/

      Twine is an open-source tool for telling interactive, nonlinear stories.

      You don’t need to write any code to create a simple story with Twine, but you can extend your stories with variables, conditional logic, images, CSS, and JavaScript when you're ready.

      Twine publishes directly to HTML, so you can post your work nearly anywhere. Anything you create with it is completely free to use any way you like, including for commercial purposes.


      Heard referenced in Reclaim Hosting community call as a method for doing "clue boards".


      Could twinery.org be used as a way to host/display one's linked zettelkasten or note card collection?

    1. Laravel is one of the most famous structural frameworks for creating efficient web applications. It provides a fast and simple environment for web developers. In this blog we have mentioned some of the best Laravel packages for 2022.

    1. But the writer cautions against concluding that open source software is less secure; it's more complicated than that.

      An analysis being presented this week says open source software is exploited faster and more effectively than proprietary solutions.

    1. Dec 13, 2021 — I want to talk about how open source has in the most cases, been turned into exploitation by the biggest organisations in the world.exploiting meaningwhat is an exploit in computer securityit exploit definition owaspexploit vs vulnerabilityexploit in cyber security exampletypes of exploitsPeople also search for
  3. Jun 2022
    1. Trusted organizations are those to which you have granted permission to interact with your iD and record, e.g. when submitting a manuscript or grant application. You decide whether to grant this access and you may revoke it at any time.
    1. Many believe that companies should give more time to employees to contribute to open source, with 79% agreeing or strongly agreeing that companies should give time during work hours to contribute.
    2. while just 20% have been paid for their contributions to open source, 53% agree or strongly agree that individuals should be paid for open source contributions
  4. May 2022
    1. Sponsorship allows me to focus my efforts on open source software. I also provide professional consulting services.
    1. As for publishing this as an actual gem on rubygems.org...I have enough open source I'm involved in all ready (or too much, as my wife would probably say) and I'm not really interested in maintaining another gem.
    1. Projects like the Open Journal System, Manifold or Scalar are based on a distributed model that allow anyone to download and deploy the software (Maxwell et al., 2019), offering an alternative to the commercial entities that dominate the scholarly communication ecosystem.

      Might Hypothes.is also be included with this list? Though it could go a bit further toward packaging and making it more easily available to self-hosters.

  5. Apr 2022
  6. Mar 2022
  7. rom-rb.org rom-rb.org
    1. We are looking for sustainable sponsorship. If your company is relying on rom-rb or simply want to see rom-rb evolve faster to meet your requirements, please consider backing the project
  8. Feb 2022
    1. Intruguing argument about how to allow more tinkering with software -- making it really easy to contribute, not just possible.

      I think for example the note-taking community is on a path towards that -- a lot of the fun is about finding your own worflow and contributing to editor plugins you like.

    2. “Well, it’s Open Source, I guess I could go download the source code… but… meh, it’s so far out of my way, not worth it,” and the urge fizzles out. I think that a lot of potential human creativity is being wasted this way.

      This reminds me of physical tinkering, like building or fixing your own small furniture. That's also hard with the products we often buy today -- it's difficult to fix minature electronics which are meant to be replaced.

      But with software (esp. open source) it could be easier, as everyone can have the same tools. I very much resonate with the idea of tinkering more and using less standards.

    3. Making changes or additions to the standard library was as easy as making changes to my own code

      For many people, making changes to code at all is hard. The few times I remember actually forking a library to add functionality, it meant hours reading into the codebase and polishing my change to commit it upstream.

      I like the author's argument, but it's not not just the friction to view source code -- many technical architectures are also needlessly complex or non-standard.

    1. Very interesting intro to financial programming at large banks. Basically, these systems replace Excel spreadsheets and thus treat everything as data with a minimal deployment process.

      It's bad that it diverges so much from normal Python programming. We can learn from some of these approaches, and so can they.

      For more context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29104047

    1. Hypothesis wurde 2011 als non-profit Organisation in San Francisco gegründet. Die Hypothes.is-Server stehen in Kalifornien. Hypothes.is ist Open Source Software und steht unter einer BSD-Lizenz. 

      -2011 -San Francisco -Open Source -BSD-Lizenz

  9. Jan 2022
    1. In my very next letter, Letter XVI, I reported that Conor had perhaps heard our concerns about the cult connotations, and also decided to move away from the use of it too.

      I always thought of the #RoamCult hashtag as a bit tongue-in-cheek, but certainly something with a more positive framing could be chosen.

      It's interesting to hear that the project seems to have gone quiet and that the perception is that people are leaving for other projects (many of them open source, which is one of the spaces many of the early adopters were already working in).

      There's definitely a drive in a lot of this space for people to own their own data given it's direct value to them over other (more social facing) tools.

  10. Dec 2021
    1. Open Source Software

      The argument for aligning OER with Open Source Software feels natural at first, but Jöran Muuß-Merholz argues that "Open is, what opens access" and that GoogleDocs might actually be more important for OER than LibreOffice. It's a utilitarian perspective. https://open-educational-resources.de/offen-ist-was-zugang-schafft-oder-warum-google-docs-fuer-oer-wichtiger-als-libre-office-ist/ (translated by Google Translate)

    1. oh by the way did i tell you it's hard like probably it's it's also really hard but i really don't want to stop here on a on a low note

      This is a great video on the reality of open source software. Open source hardware also faces similar funding issues.

      As long as open source is fundamentally dependent on the private sector, it will exist within at best a parasitic relationship. To truly develop an autonomous open source model requires a structural change in funding that allows it to stand alone and apart from corporate sponsorship.

      This is a classic chicken-and-egg situation. We want people to sponsor us, but many of those people also work for the private sector. Governments and NGOs may sponsor us, but they also depend on private sector for tax and donation revenues.

      This requires a much deeper discussion that unpacks the fundamental assumptions that underpin our economic, social and political systems. The structural challenges of funding open source exposes the constraints of our current system.

      Unless we examine the fundamental assumptions by which our current civilization operates, we cannot make the structural changes that would enable open source to reach its full potential, which is maximum access to shared intellectual and material resources for the benefit of all.

    1. Standard algorithms as a reliable engine in SaaS https://en.itpedia.nl/2021/12/06/standaard-algoritmen-als-betrouwbaar-motorblok-in-saas/ The term "Algorithm" has gotten a bad rap in recent years. This is because large tech companies such as Facebook and Google are often accused of threatening our privacy. However, algorithms are an integral part of every application. As is known, SaaS is standard software, which makes use of algorithms just like other software.

      • But what are algorithms anyway?
      • How can we use standard algorithms?
      • How do standard algorithms end up in our software?
      • When is software not an algorithm?
  11. Nov 2021
  12. Oct 2021
    1. Open source software is cited as the first domain where networked open sharing produced a tangible benefit

      The phrase should be:

      The Free Software and Open-source movements were the first domains where networked open sharing produced a tangible benefit.

      Why?

      Free Software movement started in 1983.

      Open-source movement started in 1998.

  13. Sep 2021
    1. (They blame Chrome's "feature" addition treadmill, where "they keep adding stupid kitchen sinks for the sole and only purpose to make others unable to keep up.")
  14. Aug 2021
    1. I joined Caldera in November of 1995, and we certainly used "open source" broadly at that time. We were building software. I can't imagine a world where we did not use the specific phrase "open source software". And we were not alone. The term "Open Source" was used broadly by Linus Torvalds (who at the time was a student...I had dinner with Linus and his then-girlfriend Ute in Germany while he was still a student)

      From Linus Torvalds Remembers the Days Before ‘Open Source’:

      Torvalds counters that “I wouldn’t trust Lyle Ball’s recollection 100% about me… since my girlfriend-at-the-time (now wife) name was Tove, not Ute.”

  15. Jul 2021
    1. Looking deeper, you can see a large amount of issues open, bugs taking months to fix, and pull requests never seem to be merged from outside contributors. Apollo seems unfocused on building the great client package the community wants.
    2. This sort of behaviour indicates to me that Apollo is using open-source merely for marketing and not to make their product better. The company wants you to get familiar with Apollo Client and then buy into their products, not truly open-source software in my opinion. This is one of the negatives of the open-core business model.
    1. Growth hacking and lowest common denominator experiences are their problems, so we should avoid making them our problems, too. We already have various tools for enabling growth: the freedom to use the software for any purpose being one of the most powerful. We can go the other way and provide deeply-specific experiences that solve a small collection of problems incredibly well for a small number of people. Then those people become super-committed fans because no other thing works as well for them as our thing, and they tell their small number of friends, who can not only use this great thing but have the freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does their computing as they wish—or to get someone to change it for them. Thus the snowball turns into an avalanche.

      This is exactly how I feel about Joplin - the open-source note taking application, developed as an alternative to Evernote.

  16. Jun 2021
    1. I’d still argue that offices can and do produce spontaneous, productive encounters.

      But so does any other form of collaboration. Most of the internet is run by code that was written by people communicating over email and IRC. There was no "open source office" that these people collaborated in.

    1. This, it seems to me, would be something like a readerly utopia. It could even (if we want to get all grand and optimistic) turn out to be a Gutenberg-style revolution — not for writing, this time, but for reading.

      I love the idea of this but implementation, particularly open implementation seems nearly impossible.

      Even getting digital commonplaces to align and register is tough enough much less doing multi-modal registration with the locations that books might live.

    1. Users who have installed it decided to trust me, and I'm not comfortable transferring that trust to someone else on their behalf. However, if you'd like to fork it, feel free.

      Interesting decision... Seems like the project could have been handed off to new maintainers instead of just a dead-end abandoned project and little chance of anyone using it for new projects now.

      Sure you can fork it, but without a clear indication of which of the many forks in the network graph to trust, I doubt few will take the (massively) extra time to evaluate all options and choose an existing fork as a "leader" (or create their own fork) to go with continuing maintenance...

  17. May 2021
  18. Apr 2021
    1. Manifold – Building an Open Source Publishing Platform

      Zach Davis and Matthew Gold

      Re-watching after the conference.

      Manifold

      Use case of showing the process of making the book. The book as a start to finish project rather than just the end product.

      They built the platform while eating their own cooking (or at least doing so with nearby communities).

      Use for this as bookclubs. Embedable audio and video possibilities.

      Use case where people have put journals on the platform and they've grown to add meta data and features to work for that.

      They're allowing people to pull in social media pieces into the platform as well. Perhaps an opportunity to use Webmentions?

      They support epub.

      It can pull in Gutenberg texts.

      Jim Groom talks about the idea of almost using Manifold as an LMS in and of itself. Centering the text as the thing around which we're gathering.

      CUNY Editions of standard e-books with additional resources.Critical editions.

      Using simple tools like Google Docs and then ingest them into Manifold using a YAML file.

      TEI, LaTeX formats and strategies for pulling them in. (Are these actually supported? It wasn't clear.)

      Reclaim Cloud has a container that will run Manifold.

      Zach is a big believer in UX and design as the core of their product.

    1. I also sell Sidekiq Pro and Sidekiq Enterprise, extensions to Sidekiq which provide more features, a commercial-friendly license and allow you to support high quality open source development all at the same time.
  19. Mar 2021
    1. This is not a fork. This is a repository of scripts to automatically build Microsoft's vscode repository into freely-licensed binaries with a community-driven default configuration.

      almost without a doubt, inspired by: chromium vs. chrome

    1. Sorry you’re surprised. Issues are filed at about a rate of 1 per day against GLib. Merge requests at a rate of about 1 per 2 days. Each issue or merge request takes a minimum of about 30 minutes (across at least 2 people) to analyse, put together a fix, test it, review it, fix it, review it and merge it. I’d estimate the average is closer to 3 hours than 30 minutes. Even at the fastest rate, it would take 3 working months to clear the backlog of ~1000 issues. I get a small proportion of my working time to spend on GLib (not full time).
    2. Age of a ticket is completely irrelevant as anyone can request anything but the number of developers is limited. If you'd like to see something implemented, please consider providing a patch. Thanks!
    3. Sorry if I sounded rude. I am using Gnome on a daily basis and am highly appreciating all the work anyone has put into it. I was just surprised when I found an AskUbuntu post from 2010 linking to this bug.
    4. Wow 14 years. I still keep stumbling over this issue...
    1. The reason we've avoided registering "Cinnamon" as a desktop name is that it opens up issues with many upstream apps that currently OnlyShowIn=Gnome or Gnome;Unity or just Unity. The relationship Mint has with Gnome and Ubuntu isn't genial enough that we could get them to add Cinnamon to their desktop files, so we would have to distribute and maintain separate duplicate .desktop files just for Cinnamon for these upstream packages.
    1. here is my set of best practices.I review libraries before adding them to my project. This involves skimming the code or reading it in its entirety if short, skimming the list of its dependencies, and making some quality judgements on liveliness, reliability, and maintainability in case I need to fix things myself. Note that length isn't a factor on its own, but may figure into some of these other estimates. I have on occasion pasted short modules directly into my code because I didn't think their recursive dependencies were justified.I then pin the library version and all of its dependencies with npm-shrinkwrap.Periodically, or when I need specific changes, I use npm-check to review updates. Here, I actually do look at all the changes since my pinned version, through a combination of change and commit logs. I make the call on whether the fixes and improvements outweigh the risk of updating; usually the changes are trivial and the answer is yes, so I update, shrinkwrap, skim the diff, done.I prefer not to pull in dependencies at deploy time, since I don't need the headache of github or npm being down when I need to deploy, and production machines may not have external internet access, let alone toolchains for compiling binary modules. Npm-pack followed by npm-install of the tarball is your friend here, and gets you pretty close to 100% reproducible deploys and rollbacks.This list intentionally has lots of judgement calls and few absolute rules. I don't follow all of them for all of my projects, but it is what I would consider a reasonable process for things that matter.
    2. I suspect you aren't seeing much discussion because those who have a reasonable process in place, and do not consider this situation to be as bad as everyone would have you believe, tend not to comment on it as much.
    1. JavaScript needs to fly from its comfy nest, and learn to survive on its own, on equal terms with other languages and run-times. It’s time to grow up, kid.
    2. If JavaScript were detached from the client and server platforms, the pressure of being a monoculture would be lifted — the next iteration of the JavaScript language or run-time would no longer have to please every developer in the world, but instead could focus on pleasing a much smaller audience of developers who love JavaScript and thrive with it, while enabling others to move to alternative languages or run-times.
    1. For the $$$ question, nothing comes to mind. These problems i'm hitting up against are larger than a contractor could solve in a few hours of work (which would be hundreds/thousands of dollars).
    2. Yeah, can we pay money to make this go faster? Serious question.
    3. Progress is slow though. I want to change how assets are loaded, the current implementation of "pipelines" is challenging to work with.
    1. OpenFaaS is hosted by OpenFaaS Ltd (registration: 11076587), a company which also offers commercial services, homepage sponsorships, and support.
    1. On the “lows” side, I’d say the worst thing was the impact of not being present enough for my family. I was working a full-time job and doing faastRuby on nights and weekends. Here I want to give a big shout out to my wife. She supported me through this and didn’t cut my head off in the process.
  20. Feb 2021
    1. Testing your open source projects will always be free! Seriously. Always. We like to think of it as our way of giving back to a community that connects so many people.
    1. Our mission is to allow people to make money via educational efforts and to dedicate the rest of their time to creating great open source products.

      What does this mean exactly? "Our mission is to allow people to make money via educational efforts"

    1. We’re now relaunching PRO, but instead of a paid chat and (never existing) paid documentation, your team gets access to paid gems, our visual editor for workflows, and a commercial license.
    2. And yes, at TRB GmbH, we do pay people to work on OSS
    3. To tell you the truth, the new tracing feature was the original reason why I decided to write 2.1 and make you sit and wait in agony for years. Nevertheless, tracing is simply blowing my mind. I can’t count how many hours and angering rushs of adrenaline I’ve saved since the introduction of the wtf? method and its helpful higher-level stack trace.
    1. note that TRB source code modifications are not proprietary

      In other words, you can build on this software in your proprietary software but can't change the Trailblazer source unless you're willing to contribute it back.

      loophole: I wonder if this will actually just push people to move their code -- which at the core is/would be a direction modification to the source code - out to a separate module. That's so easy to do with Ruby, so this restriction hardly seems like it would have any effect on encouraging contributions.

    2. Trailblazer (TRB) is an Open-Source project. Since we want to keep it that way, we decided to raise awareness for the “cost” of our work - providing new versions and features is incredibly time-consuming for us, but we love what we do.
    3. This creates a win-win situation, you as the user have your peace of mind, and we can continue working with your funds.
    1. Great thanks to Blake Education for giving us the freedom and time to develop this project in 2013 while working on their project.
    1. This gives them a slight edge but that’s nothing substantial because those fixes eventually reach Ubuntu.
    1. But all of these attempts misunderstand why the Open Source ecosystem is successful as a whole. The ecosystem of fairly standard licenses provides a level playing field that allows collaboration with low friction, and produces massive value for everyone involved – both to those that contribute and to those that don't. It is not without problems (there are many essential but unsexy projects that are struggling with funding), but introducing more friction won't improve the success of this ecosystem – it will just lead to some parts of the ecosystem to break off.
    2. Part of me thinks that open source can be more rewarding to the creators/contributors. But maybe the real contribution is the permanent addition to the tools available to humanity, and if you have the wits, you can make a decent business out of it without tainting open source.
    3. Selling proprietary software is difficult when there is so much gratis Open Source software around.
    4. For a sufficiently successful and industry-relevant open source project, it's possible for the main developers to earn a living e.g. by selling related consulting services.
    5. It turns out that creating and using Free Software is not just good to individuals, but for businesses as well, for example by building upon publicly available components and by collaborating shared software. The term Open Source is a business-friendly rebranding of the Free Software concept. This line of thought was also widely successful, e.g. Firefox/Mozilla was an open sourcing of Netscape software.
  21. Jan 2021
    1. Lemmy is a great open source federated and privacy respecting alternative to Reddit. Nodes can be self-hosted and posts will sync between them.

    1. Unfortunately, this probably means a death knoll for this gem, at least I predict it will contribute to its slow trajectory towards insignificance/unknownness/lack-of-users.

      Why? Because it is already the less popular option in this comparison: https://ruby.libhunt.com/compare-premailer-rails-vs-roadie-rails

      and being actively maintained is an important factor in evaluating competing options.

      So of course people will see that the premailer option is the option that is still actively maintained, is still continuing to be improved, and they'll see that this one has been relegated to dormancy/stagnancy/neglect/staleness, which will only amplify the degree/sense of abandonment it already has from its maintainer (only now it will be its users that start to abandon it, as I now have).

    2. At work, I cannot maintain this project. At home, I'd rather spend time with my children and on projects that I'm currently passionate about.
    1. unlike a traditional computer, a blockchain computer can offer strong trust guarantees, rooted in the mathematical and game-theoretic properties of the system. A user or developer can trust that a piece of code running on a blockchain computer will continue to behave as designed, even if individual participants in the network change their motivations or try to subvert the system. This means that the control of a blockchain computer can be placed in the hands of a community
    1. Augmented Steam is an open source project. You can verify the code for yourself, help us improve it or create your very own version.
    1. Would you work for free? It is a simple but loaded question that requires additional context. Is it working to help a friend do something? Is it work that you would enjoy? Does the act of working for free give you some level of satisfaction? Your gut reaction to the question may have been a hearty, “No,” but many people volunteer for a variety of things all the time, so people will work for free when there is something in it they enjoy.
    2. Open source is fundamentally good with the transparency and flexibility it brings; however, as our reliance on it goes up, the overall investment back into the ecosystem has not. It can be easy to take for granted the time and effort many developers put into open source projects. Yet it is with their time and effort that we often save our own.
    3. These developers are not greedy or selfish for wanting funding for their projects. To the contrary, they want funding to keep the project alive. A person has to eat, after all. Funding the project is a means of changing the maintainer’s timeshare—allowing themselves to put time into the project that otherwise would be used for other employment. There is only so much time in a day that a person can otherwise give.