What does HackerNews think of git-bug?
Distributed, offline-first bug tracker embedded in git, with bridges
- CRDT-like reusable data structure [2][3] for true p2p workflow and easily create new entities (code review ...)
- bidirectional bridges to github, gitlab ... to ease the transition or just use git-bug as a complement of those platform
- CLI, terminal UI and web UI, for different taste and integrate into your tooling/workflow
[1]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug
[2]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/doc/model...
[3]: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/blob/master/entity/da...
Offline-first bug tracker (and soon-ish forge) embedded in git.
I keep working on this because the idea makes a lot of sense to me, because I learn a lot from it and it benefits me indirectly.
I'm not especially looking to monetize, but I'm curious about what this community think about it.
git does need a 'git bug' to track bugs though, as https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug does, but I prefer to have it built in git directly if possible.
I'm hoping that this could spawn a new kind of developer tools, where all the "metadata" (bugs, kanban ...) of a project are stored and shipped alongside the code, always available offline, integrated in our tool of choice and always snappy.
If you have experience in that domain, please pock holes in it. There is always tradeoffs, but I'm hoping to avoid fundamental flaws.
In the mean time, git-bug[0] itself is close to a 1.0 release. This Show HN is a step in making sure the data model is correct and strong. Thank you!
It's close to be ready for prime time, yet there is so much that could be done to make it better.