Yes, git, however host a repo for anyone it's another story. In the past most FOSS projects was mirrored by tons of different participants, mostly universities, ISPs, companies with reasonable resource and being part of the project itself they can be considered friendly.
now with GitHub&c excluding Savannah the sole friendly option is buy a domain, a VPS and host there the project...
That's the problem, not technical but "political" to a certain extent.
In the past someone try GitTorrent to solve this problem a bit (opening the door for "personal hosting at home" but it's a dead project now ad it was never completed. Mostly because newcomers think GitHub&c as a free space by nature, something guarantee to work always and been always free without any other "occult" cost.
I reformulate: no governments that theoretically can achieve free energy want it, perhaps governments that can't dream it as a temporary solution to find a way to lock it out for their own sake. Better?
Keep in mind a thing: hitler was not blocked via military operation forces against forces nor interior civil war but due to the lack of gasoline. And that's true for essentially anything. If you can "ground" a country you can rule it to a certain extent a thing any government powerful enough want.
Did you remember prohibitionist in the USA to avoid an improbable development of alcohol powered cars because produce alcohol is easy, produce gasoline it's not?
Perhaps it not comply to USA regulation but for my home I opt to design custom interior wall (simple commercial iron profile instead of classic plasterboard structure) and countertops with wood planks and joint covers (from nearest wood store) so I can open nearly anything and nearly anything look like reasonably well.
Interior walls are simply heavy cut-ed 60x30x1.5mm vertical beams with horizontal ligatures made of flat iron 40x2mm covered with "insulation scotch" for noise reduction purpose. Wood planks are coupled vertically three/four maximum in the garage with a simple bar to hang furniture as a horizontal joint. Skirting and ceiling joint covers permit insertion and remove thank to the interior "female side" of the last wood planks cut-ed out before mount.
It was far more complex than what I consider at start (and I still have to finish many parts) but IMO it's cheap, good-looking and comfortable enough to being worth it. With that any kind of implant can be accessed directly without brake anything and when it's time to repaint it can be done again in the garden/garage instead of cover up anything inside...
It miss the Google assistant trigger, unless you write some kind of support but offer an incomparable comfort and effective environment + of course the entire org :-)
Because it's not "founding" but alms. With some intermediary subjects that gain and reign as they want. Not much different than Ottoman's empire "islamic alms" that was in fact a form of imposition on citizen for the sake of few in the upper pyramid.
If project like Django need maintenance the answer is: universities. Universities train students and can easily maintain projects providing not only people but also resources.
FOSS is knowledge, so a thing that need to be entirely public and entirely relay on public. It is ok if a company need a certain software and so develop it, it is not ok to be "founded" like Patreon, LibrePay, PayPal donation etc. We need freedom and participation not charity.
Of course there are FOSS paid developers, for instance Intel pay few devs to work on Linux in order to have the hw they sell work properly. That's good. That's not someone that live on FOSS, that's a company that participate to a FOSS project because it need or desire it.
On contrary there are other companies that pretend to sell "open" product that are open like a bunker (to name a few try looking for business software from ERP to CRM to DMS etc) and those are not contributed to FOSS. Even if they both pay someone to develop FOSS code and publish it.
I hope to have being able to clarify that point in my limited English...
On complex codebase: FreeBSD codebase is not exactly simple and little, but it live on it own foot since decades, for instance? Emacs, Debian, ... the same. I do not intent that a project must run on casual contribution but simply that contributors must be subjects that need/desire such code so they contribute to it for their own sake like the Intel example above.
When I was a bit younger I read that "internet" was a fantastic decentralized infrastructure explicitly design to being fault-tolerant and unlockable as possible to survive any critical scenario... Now it seems more a deep substrate of a modern mainframe... So deep that only few subject can really access it, all others are in their own hand...
Ah ok, so you change Microsoft cloud for Google cloud... UAU... And what about PRs&c?
Sorry for being rude but for me is unacceptable to depend on tons of proprietary stuff from a handful of vendors. Even personal websites that use Google Fonts, some JS framework directly from the "project" CDN (too hard to keep it on your disk, up to date) etc...
We need to be interdependent or independent not dependent of few subjects that make money on us for witch us are puppets. How can we say "it's FOSS" if so? How can we have FOSS as the tip of a proprietary iceberg?
Sorry for my poor English: I mean "most lives are lived by defaults" because we live in a society that prize and push Ford-model workers, pyramidal organization. So most people simply follow the stream, do thing different is simply to hard these days.
In a future utopia perhaps we can have a different society but that's is utopia today.
IMO no, it isn't. FOSS project need participation, so not money but resources. FOSS idea is that software is knowledge, something that must be public and grow through interaction (sharing). So if I have a need or a desire and I start implementing it others may or may not join because they share the same or similar need or desire. That's the FOSS way.
I start a new project, for instance to autoclassify documents. Ok users of my code will contributed in code, hosting, documentation simply because they share my similar need/desire. If there is interest there is no need for money, software is not a product nor a thing we can live on. It's shared knowledge. There are no "producer" nor "consumers", only participants.
If we have a single-man-show that say "hey, found me so I can keep the project up" it means that:
- we completely lost FOSS model, transformed to a sort of neopatronage, the erotic dream of proprietary vendors that dream a world of products to be sold and bought;
- the project is already dead not because of lack of founds but because of lack of participants, knowledge, interest.
Hem, no perhaps is my poor English but you do not understand: I know what a git remote is. My point is what kind of "other remote" a typical FOSS project have these days?
In the past we have tons of hosters so we can easily spread our code in many "mirror", now there is GitHub and few others, mostly on the very same "cloud".
I mean you have no damn viable remote. Single devs can share code P2P but nothing that can work instantly out of the box.
Of course, like the trend "hey if it does not work for you write down your code"...
On git only: what is another remote? A GitHub concurrent company? A personal dyndns from a single developer with a fable ADSL?
On GitHub: many use it's proprietary characteristics like PR, wikies, pages etc. That's not "portable" to any other remote if you do not count site-scraping...
No, we need to focus on distributed/decentralized solution now.
In the past at least we use tons of different hosting most of them offered by ISP that actually use hosted projects, universities that actually participate in many FOSS project so while not distributed we are decentralized on "friendly" systems. Not nearly all FOSS project is on a super-big-corp server. Without any viable alternative ready to use.
I do not want to depend on any proprietary platform, it doesn't matter if it's friendly or not.
I favor a distributed model as much as possible, that means for now having personal/projects classic websites, mirrored for instance on ZeroNet&c and source code exchanged as much as possible only P2P. It's not comfortable now but that's the sole possible free evolution path we have and only investing in it now can ease situation tomorrow.
Nice but no. We need to push Free Software and to push it at political level, with the target of forbid closed source products.
We do not need subsistence economy, we already won technically, open code is everywhere now. The big loss is the miss of political support. The big loss is the mass ignorance of how private companies trap open code in closed "boxes" from Android to WSL/DeX/Crostini to our PND/NAS/router/*.
That's the real point to get and IMO apart FSF we need to take action at school/universities level, workplaces etc. Putting money like that is a way to loose money without return.
Mh in the past many work came from another project ConTeXt from Pragma-ade a sort of LaTeX with an easy DSL and a tons of style. however many other are in a similar state while LaTeX survive, the others, included mythical languages like *roff or docbook die or remain marginal...
Long story short: thanks for sharing your work, that's good and if it serve you it's a very smart move but I do not expect a real "success".
They simply can't... Less powerful in that sense means less developed. Such kind of research demand enormous resources and knowledge.
These days industrial knowledge is mostly in private hands with universities that are not anymore a "center of (public) knowledge" bu mere gym to form Ford-models workers with a different skillset respect of classic one but not much different in terms of ability to understand the big picture, being autonomous etc.
In present society there is no room for new "Einstein", "Tesla" etc.
IMO bamboo can't be a bigger thing than wood simply because:
- bamboo cultivation came from not-much-developed countries, so not much good for us and not much easy to develop for them;
- bamboo duration, even with not so cheap treatments, is far less than the wood;
- bamboo fire resistance is very low, even with not so cheap treatments;
There is a trend in the western for bamboo simply because we consume more wood than natural regeneration and we need cheaper alternatives but this trend is really limited to consumer stuff, not structural/real architecture one as many do in some Asian and south-American countries...
That's was a classic in many different society in many different time... Have "non standard" life for most people means a rapidly evolving society that push innovation, experimentation and freedom. The exact opposite of modern society... Also the exact opposite of classic industrialized society because even if we are in CNC era mass production to be economically sustainable still need standard repetitive production.
IMO even when (if) we will arrive in the 3D printing industrial era we will remains for decades in "standard" society simply because even if we push 3D printing to incredible level becoming able to print nearly any kind of artifact we use daily it will still be an expensive slow process respect of a dedicated machinery.
Perhaps in a far far (and hypothetical) future when we will have easy and powerful 3D parametric CAD systems with fully interchangeable formats, with built-in CAE easily accessible to nearly anyone at least for basic simulation, with a so advanced machining that we can simply drop our part in a directory and the software take care to suggest material we need and auto-produce it we will see a new "modern era" of personal development. And this future is unlikely for many thing, industrial control is one of them: if we are able to produce really "individually" anything we are free. Too free for actual ruling classes. We can produce positive innovation that impact some rich&powerful business, we can produce weapons, we can innovate in unwanted directions etc.
Remember formally in the western we are citizens in democracy, but that's formally, a results of our ancestors fights, that was never really complete and vanish more and more every days.
now with GitHub&c excluding Savannah the sole friendly option is buy a domain, a VPS and host there the project...
That's the problem, not technical but "political" to a certain extent.
In the past someone try GitTorrent to solve this problem a bit (opening the door for "personal hosting at home" but it's a dead project now ad it was never completed. Mostly because newcomers think GitHub&c as a free space by nature, something guarantee to work always and been always free without any other "occult" cost.