I’m not quite sure how it will work yet, but it would have the entire codebase and its history mirrored onto every developer's computer. Instead of requiring a central repository, developers could share their changes directly with each other.

[–] Krafting@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Maybe something on the blockchain??

JK JK don't burn me on the public place!!

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

git itself is really not far from a blockhain. Blockchain is fine, it only has a bad rep because of ponzi schemes that use it to create crypto, but the technology and trustless consensus mechanisms are interesting.

[–] mogranja@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think blockchain also has a bad rep because every chance is mirrored to every copy of the blockchain? Thus wasting a lot of power and bandwidth for most use cases. Unlike git, where you only push what you want, and everyone only pulls what they want.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The waste of power is often associated to the proof of work consensus, but that's not a requirement of blockchain. There are other ways to create consensus.

The bandwidth requirements really depend on what's being stored, but it's usually very manageable for a server. And clients not running validation don't need to store or transfer that much data.

[–] mogranja@lemmy.eco.br 1 points 3 months ago

Oh, I didn't know that. I need to read up on blockchain so I don't put my foot in my mouth.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (23 replies)