59
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gigachad@piefed.social 15 points 1 year ago
[-] artyom@piefed.social 4 points 1 year ago

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

[-] gigachad@piefed.social 11 points 1 year ago

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

[-] sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al 6 points 1 year ago

It was forked before the previous one died funnily enough

[-] Chais@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

With open source you never have a guarantee for long-term support.

Not like you have that with closed source …

[-] artyom@piefed.social -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[-] gigachad@piefed.social 7 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] artyom@piefed.social -2 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] artyom@piefed.social 1 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago

Good job avoiding my point entirely :)

[-] artyom@piefed.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I didn't avoid your point at all.

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

[-] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's still something that may happen. Just because you think that third party is more likely to go away doesn't mean it will happen. So yes, you completely avoided my point and continue to do so. You even used "might" earlier. That sounds a lot like may to me.

[-] artyom@piefed.social 1 points 1 year ago
[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

I'm still using the old app, it may lack some new features, but it was already good enough

[-] Flagstaff@programming.dev 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.)

this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2025
59 points (100.0% liked)

Opensource

6649 readers
525 users here now

A community for discussion about open source software! Ask questions, share knowledge, share news, or post interesting stuff related to it!

CreditsIcon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS