Unity Build Automation is a great platform for letting games teams get build automation up and running quickly.
But build times are often really inconsistent, and sometimes just stall indefinitely rather than "failing".
When you're paying per-minute to run on Unity's hardware, this can become an expensive frustration..
I felt it myself recently, when I noticed Unity had been running a build for 11 days... without the build even ever starting on the runner, yet billing me for the time.
Unity were super helpful and refunded me thankfully, but this really highlighted for me the need for having an enforced timeout on the build.
So we just built this feature into Buildstash and our existing integration with Unity.
Teams using Buildstash with Unity can configure timeouts for each Unity build configuration - since you might know you expect an Android build to take longer than an iOS one, for example!
Buildstash will watch for the build stalling, and send an API request to Unity to cancel the build if it does.
Super simple, but hopefully solves a major frustration for Unity devs.
Will take on board leading more with.. this is for app, game, and embedded teams!
We're not really focused on smaller teams exactly, but more all the teams who don't currently use a dedicated binary management tool, but whose workflow would benefit from one they'd actually enjoy using (which we think are most teams..)
As Microsoft shutters App Center today, many developers are on the lookout for a replacement.
Here's a thing I wrote on the history of App Center from its HockeyApp origins, why it's a loss for many teams, and why we're building something new (Buildstash) to replace it across all platforms.
Indeed, AFFiNE is also local-first! Anytype does have a lot of distinct functionality though, and the P2P model is a big plus there over other options..
That said, AFFiNE also appears to be genuinely open source, while Anytype is only source available.
So firstly - been an Anytype beta user for a while here, and it's great to see the launch! And how far Anytype has come on recently - a previous frustration admittedly was that the app and data sync could feel quite sluggish at times, and the latest release is way snappier and feels more stable! Excited to see how the project develops.
I did want to echo some of the points already raised regarding licensing.. From the outset, when I heard of the Anytype project some time ago, the whole thing that got me excited about it, and why I've been following it so attentively for so long, was the promise of an "open source, privacy-first, p2p, Notion alternative". While I'm sure we can all respect the licensing model you've settled on from a commercial perspective, and being source-available with select open source components is far more welcome over a fully closed model, it clearly does not make the project as a whole open source. While that's quite disappointing, it's positive to see you're acknowledging this and tweaking how you present the open source nature of the project to accurately reflect!
I did just want to ask however if you might have considered a licensing model similar to a project like Sentry? They also fully open source select components under permissive licences (MIT/Apache), but for key commercial elements they instead adopt the Business Source Licence (https://open.sentry.io/licensing/). This is very similar to the terms of your "Any Source Available License" in allowing personal use but restricting commercial use, with the very key caveat that it only enforces these restrictions for a period of 36 months, after which point the licence for those elements reverts to Apache 2.0.
Such a restriction would in theory protect commercial interests in a similar manner (only code from more than 36 months ago, or whatever delay preferred, is fully open sourced), but make the project far more open in spirit, and critically allay concerns Anytype will otherwise attract as a non open source project. For example - what happens if Anytype go closed in future once people are already bought in / if the organisation or development ceases at some point / if some decision was to be made in future which compromises user privacy or security, etc! A key element of open source is that trust doesn't just come from saying "trust me, honest!", but also from the licensing model - if the project disappears or is somehow compromised, it can be forked. Such a licence would allow this (with a delay!)
Might you have considered such a license, and if so would be curious your thoughts on why that isn't your preferred approach?
We use Git with LFS for our games-orientated projects, including some pretty massive projects, and have found it works really well.
We previously used SVN for similar projects, and made the switch to Git once LFS made it a feasible choice for projects with lots of large binary assets (games), and honestly never looked back, it's massively improved our workflow.
I'm having the same issue. Previously created an account, and I'm completely puzzled how to now log in to it! Seem to have options to create a new account or import a backup..
This is clean and love the git-backed approach. Would love to see a dark mode too!