Recent twts in reply to #rqifctq

@prologic@twtxt.net @mckinley@twtxt.net I can’t pretend to understand the guts since I just found it and only tinkered with it for a few minutes. But I can say that git bug push did this:

remote: Updating references: 100% (1/1)           
remote: Updating references: 100% (1/1)        19cf0dc6b52363cf5b8032755b16a5 -> refs/identities/af97ed38e619cf0dc6b52363cf5b8032755b16a5remote: Updating references: 100% (1/1)           
 * [new reference]   refs/bugs/00fd29b9f50294a64ad72c039a7340b5863d7907 -> refs/bugs/00fd29b9f50294a64ad72c039a7340b5863d7907

So it puts stuff in $DIR/.git/refs. It creates a cache directory too.

I have to say, it’s surprisingly full-featured given that it’s pre 1.0 and the main author warns that there be dragons here (though not so surprising given that there are over 2,000 commits!). You can do the entire create/label/comment on/push/pull/clear bug workflow entirely on the CLI with git subcommands, which is how I’d probably use it were I to adopt this. The webui looks remarkably like github/gitea/etc if you’re into that.

⤋ Read More

@movq@uninformativ.de I think I like that choice? Not sure yet since I haven’t tried using it for anything real. I do like the fact that it doesn’t introduce a bunch of weird files to your repository that you then have to worry about managing.

⤋ Read More

Ah git-bug! Ive chatted with the creator when he was working on the graphql parts. Its working with git objects directly sorta like how git-repo does code reviews. Its a pretty neat idea for storing data along side the branches. I believe they don’t add a disconnected branch to avoid data getting corrupted by merging branches or something like that.

⤋ Read More


Login or Register to join in on this yarn.