• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: November 8th, 2023

help-circle




  • You assumed and misinterpreted everything you could assume and misinterpret in order to paint standard notes in the best possible light.

    the old approach wasn’t very secure or scalable?

    No, the older approach was more scalable, and they made it more difficult to do

    95-99% of the Javascript that has ever run in your browser is open source frameworks or packages

    No, I was not talking about frameworks.

    Your response was so offbase and full of assumptions that I simply edited my original post.

    All FOSS projects have a team of dictators

    And the Standard Notes team makes a lot of bad choices that make self-hosting harder.

    “Just fork it and make your own” is a Hail Mary response… Because most people cannot.


  • Standard Notes wants to charge you money to run open source JavaScript code, including other people’s markdown and spreadsheet editors, on your own server. To do this, they go out of their way to make self-hosting harder.

    1. Standard Notes went out of their way to make it harder to self-host extensions a couple years ago, which IMO was pretty tasteless on its own. Instead of letting you install a single bundle of extensions with one URL, you would have to manually add each extension and then manually update it later.

    2. They opted for charging for other people’s work. Their editor extensions were other people’s work. For example, their rich text editor was somebody else’s rich text editor with a thin wrapper that allowed it to run in Standard Notes. (Using so many other people’s editors also led to a bit of a lack of stylistic direction.)

    3. And then, more recently, they decided to shut off web app access to third-party servers entirely.

    “FOSS” only means so much when they dictate what goes into the source code. Unfortunately.