Hello.
Is it possible to contact someone who is responsible for IPFS on GitHub? I submitted the pull request 2 weeks ago, but nobody replied. The pull request was not accepted nor rejected. No feedback …
I will be happy to get any response.
Thank you.
Martin
Could you please link your pull requests ?
Thank you for your quick reply: IPFSBay by IPFSBay · Pull Request #414 · ipfs/awesome-ipfs · GitHub
Once I submitted the PR, the GitHub confirmed it and I got the notification e-mail that the maintaner provide an initial feedback/triaging within two business days.
But nothing happened, no feedback
Thank you.
Martin
Yeah, this message is wrong sorry. It’s very random and depends on the priorities at the time and how important is the repo (ipfs-awesome is not very important).
@lidel any idea how often that automation runs? Looking at the commit history it looks like an action usually triggers in about a minute, but it doesn’t look like that happened this time :3.
it should be in CI but it seems to be broken: Merge pull request #417 from ipfs/chore/remove-dead-links · ipfs/awesome-ipfs@ce8f8f5 · GitHub
Publishing website updates on awesome.ipfs.io does not work at the moment, fix is tracked in:
Hello.
Any estimation when (approx) the issue will be solved?
Thanks.
Martin
We should talk about this at IPFS Thing. It’s embarrassing how old and broken many of the links are on that site.
Yes, let’s brainstorm next week. My hot take: def. should be revamped and not blocked on limited time IPFS team has – moving hosting to something like Fleek and creating a community group of maintainers to help to curate PRs in GitHub - ipfs/awesome-ipfs: Useful resources for using IPFS and building things on top of it repo would help a lot.
Yes. And likely move to a more traditional awesome list rather than this weirdo build process.
Or at least — do the README version as is tradition and publish a version of that to IPFS as well.
Since we’re dunking on the awesome-list I’m going to add that it’s embarrassing that there are only only about a dozen links under “data sets”.
“IPFS is awesome! It’s a distributed content addressable file system.”, “That sounds really cool there must be a ton of really cool stuff on there”, “Well, there are cooking recipes, a copy of the internet archive, Geocities archive… You remember Geocities don’t you???”
Yes, IPFS is awesome. But IPFS is a protocol for a company that “wants to be IPFS”, that wants to be independent of a central authority (with all the consequences). I’m not sure most people think that way (unfortunately).
Many IPFS services today are for pinning files only. It works, it’s relatively cheap, it’s cool, but what’s the point of having a single files in IPFS (eg websites or recipes/archives as you mentioned) without some sort of “ecosystem” around it? I mean without any services that bring any benefit…?
My opinion is that we should run projects that will bring some benefits to regular users…and they will be able to make money for themselves.
Because at it’s foundation that’s what IPFS is about, providing files or data. Dropbox is a $8B company doing just that so there seems to be plenty of demand for that sort of thing. IPFS has some serious problems if the pitch is, “We provide a distributed file sharing system but don’t have any files. Don’t worry it will be great once we get some services”. Just ask yourself what this pitch would have sounded like for the web. “It’s awesome. You can link pages together. We don’t have any yet but I’m sure once we get some services someone will make some”
I hate to say this but I see a lot of similarities between the semantic web and IPFS. Not the technical aspects but the ecosystem. A promising technology with fundamental weaknesses that no one wants to discuss.
