On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 01:52:13PM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote: > https://lwn.net/Articles/775963/ has an article about sr.ht. > In particular, it says: > > As mentioned, sr.ht has not taken the approach of being yet another GitHub > clone. Instead, it is geared toward a mailing-list-centric approach, possibly > using the sr.ht mailing list component. The sr.ht-dev mailing list (seen at > right) provides an example of the user interface for that component. Unlike > some other forges or mailing-list replacements, it is not JavaScript-heavy—in > fact, sr.ht uses no JavaScript at all, so pages are small (less than 10KB on > average) and load quickly. > > ----- > > I think that there may be many IETFers who will see some major advantages. > JavaScript-free, component based, email focused. Probably also software > we can run ourselves. I don't mind JS, but pages (including the JS they use) must be small. In fact, I prefer web services to be build as a REST JSON API for accessing data and performing operations, and a static HTML and JS front-end that uses that API. The reasons I like that approach: a) users immediately get an API they can call from non-browser-based utilities, b) third parties get an API they can call from their apps, c) this design greatly reduces page reloads, d) this simplifies implementation of the service. I very much like the email focus. GitHub has a rather limited e-mail interface that leaves much to be desired (can't use markdown in email, users don't get email copies of their own comments, no way to create issues or PRs by e-mail, no way to manage issue metadata via email, ....). Also, for the IETF we very much need immutable archives, but GitHub and alike allow editing of comments. An e-mail gateway would be a good tool for providing archival of commentary. > I haven't had time to try it yet (just signed up for an account), but I will > put a draft or two on it, and see how I like it. I look forward to your report. Nico --
