From: freet@aussies.space (The Free Thinker)
Subject: Re: GophHub - Browse GitHub on Gopher
Newsgroups: tilde.gopher
References: <u92333$27dr4$1@tilde.club> <6cb4086e-624c-4457-943b-7776c0ac464e@tilde.club>
User-Agent: tin/2.6.2-20221225 ("Pittyvaich") (Linux/6.4.4-200.fc38.x86_64 (x86_64))

xwindows <xwindows@tilde.club> wrote:
> B. you finally solved the auth'signing algorithm issue 
> in your normal client, or have worked around it. 
> (How? If you don't mind telling)

For the next time SSH requirements get upgraded, I'm now
considering attempting to cross-compile PuTTY by chrooting to a
copy of the older distro's root file system on a PC running a
current Linux distro, then using bind mounts and LD_LIBRARY_PATH to
run cmake and make from the newer distro, thinking that they're
running in the older distro.

Right now I'm posting via SSH to tilde.club with PuTTY 0.76 (last
PuTTY to build without CMake) running on a PC from the mid 90s and
Linux from the mid 2000s.

> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023, The Free Thinker wrote:
> 
>> GitHub really annoyed me this month 
>> by starting to require Javascript 
>> in the web view of Git repos 
>> just to browse directories and source code.
> 
> Yeah, noticed that for some time now. 
> Interface-wise, it's now no better than the JavaS'creep-infected GitLab-- 

Yes I was hoping to find a universal way to browse all Git repos
without downloading their contents, so that it would work with
GitLab as well, but Git just isn't designed for that unfortunately.

> while GitLab is still a libre software. 
> Now Gitea/Forgejo is way better in this regard, 
> so as SourceHut, Gogs, Savannah, SourceForge/Apache Allura; 
> or even barebone things like CGit, GitWeb, or Stagit 
> in a specific browse-only department. [1]

Really just a directory tree of the Git repo indexed by the web
server (with CGI processing disabled) would suit me. A separate
tree with source code files syntax highlighed in HTML would be a
bonus. Of course that's basically a static implementation of what
GophHub offers via Gopher.

>> My answer is GophHub: 
>> gopher://tilde.club/1/~freet/gophhub/
> 
> Thanks for writing this, 
> it is indeed a needed workaround for plebs like us 
> to deal with projects that somehow want to cling there for whatever 
> (usually corporate, inertia, sunk cost) reason.
> 
> Though it's still my stance that a proper long-term solution 
> is advising people to get off that code-laundering (dis)service, 
> refrain from participating (sending bug reports/patches) there [3], 
> and/or avoid getting involved with projects which insist on such disservice 
> to be a sole public participation channel in the first place.

Indeed, but if being bought by Microsoft wasn't enough to scare
the open-source community off GitHub already, then I don't know
what is.

But as much as I dislike the centralisation around GitHub, when
looking for obscure open-source projects or code examples by
searching with Duck Duck Go (which admittedly is itself
Microsoft-associated via Bing as a primary data source), adding
"site:github.com" to the search string has become an extremely
useful technique.

-- 

- The Free Thinker      |      gopher://aussies.space/1/%7efreet/

