59
Syncthing 2.0 Launches With Major Database Overhaul (linuxiac.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/opensource@programming.dev
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Release Note

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sure. Is this viable long term? Why was it forked? Will it even work with 2.0?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    With open source you never have a guarantee for long-term support. I guess it was forked because the original app was not maintained anymore?

    Idk about 2.0, but I am using this app for a year now. It got 3 updates last month

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Yeah that's the thing. I can't be dependent on such a thing that very well might stop functioning at any time. The fact that it's not first-party does not fill me with confidence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well then you you need to pay for proprietary software or give your data to Google and friends.

    There is no such thing aa "first party" in most open source projects. This repo has contributions by 111 different developers at the moment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well then you you need to pay for proprietary software or give your data to Google and friends.

    No. No I sure don't.

    There is no such thing aa "first party"

    There is. It's the original development team of the project.

    This repo has contributions by 111 different developers at the moment.

    All to the same first-party SyncThing repo.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    There is. It's the original development team of the project.

    The one that got discontinued, you mean? It didn't matter that it was "first party" as it still got the axe. This fork has existed for multiple years now, and may end up having a longer life than the "first party" one had.

    This is not uncommon in the open source space.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    it still got the axe

    Yes I do remember saying that a few hours ago.

    may end up having a longer life than the "first party" one had.

    You can "may" anything you want.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Good job avoiding my point entirely :)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I didn't avoid your point at all.

    I wasn't discussing what "may" happen. I was discussing what's more likely to happen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Why was it forked?

    The original was a battery-life vampire and had fewer features. I don't know if it will work with 2.0, though, which is why I'm waiting for an update or 2 on that side before taking the plunge on desktop.

    One thing's for sure, though; I'm dead meat if one of them fails. (Well, not entirely; I suppose I could painstakingly create a file-transferring script to "sync" stuff, but it'd take quite a while.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent