Is anyone else concerned about the source being on M$ GitHub? (If not, maybe revisit Microsoft’s history (of tactical E.E.E. (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish) and much more.))
Perhaps could be on a Gogs/Gitea or Gitlab instance instead? Even self hosted? 
NotABug.org’s nice, but I could see solid even more at home with its own gitlab instance.
P.S. I utterly adore the promise of solid. Very excited & enthused.
There has been some talk of moving repos to GitLab, or setting up something self hosted, but it takes time and focus which is limited resource for us right now 
Sufficient to say, you are not alone in voicing your concern, and we are mindful of this. Will let you know if/when there are updates on this.
Hello,
I’m another one from the Safenet forum.
I’ve encountered the topic ‘Can we haz GitSafe plz?’ there, which you may find interesting.
Especially https://github.com/solid-git seems relevant here.
Just to note, there’s interest being raised in having Git supported on Solid in node-solid-server as well. But as @kjetil mentions there, it might be a bit to much work for now.
It seems that https://github.com/solid-git is still in the reseach phase, let’s see how it goes. (I would’ve preferred it having a MIT license though.)
I’m not a license specialist, but why do you prefer MIT? To give companies more freedom in using it?
Edit. This article describes why MIT is more popular the last couple of years: more pragmatic. Not sure if that is a good thing.
I’m not a license specialist either, but software using GPL license cannot be included in MIT licensed software:
MIT licensed software can be integrated into GPL software, but not the other way around (source)
Most Solid-projects have a MIT license.
forge fed announcement, worthy of consideration?
https://socialhub.network/t/forgefed-project-hosting-federation/341
… this is a common misconception. I have come across a number of GPL-licensed apps over the years that included components licensed under “MIT” (as approved by the OSI).
IANAL but my understanding is that the copyleft aspect of GPL does indeed require components that are substantially linked with it to be available under the terms of the GPL. But that doesn’t extinguish anyone’s right to continue using those components under the original license. This only becomes a problem in a license that specifically forbids the code being made available under different license terms, which the wording of the “MIT” does not. There is a long list of licenses on the GNU.org site that …
“qualify as free software licenses, and are compatible with the GNU GPL.”
… and this includes both the Expat License and the X11 license, both of which are functionally identical to what the OSI calls the “MIT License”.
In January it was announced that ForgeFed is getting funded by NLNet (please note the new URL for the SocialHub forum). ForgeFed would be another excellent project area for combining the approaches of both the Solid and ActivityPub protocols, as they mostly solve different problems. Perhaps some of this funding could be used to experiment with implementing Solid in a friendly fork of Vervis, the reference implementation for the ForgeFed standard? Anyone interested in this could open a thread in the ForgeFed area of the Feneas forum
That is cool. I did not know there was an interest in having Git supported on NSS, neither of solid-git. A few weeks ago, I just started to implement a minimal solid filesystem (absolutely rudimentary), which can be used by isomorphic-git. I thought that to extend NSS to implement git-backend functionalities contradicts with the Solid-Spec. But since there is even an open issue I will give it a shot.
My current experience is that it is not really performant, which is especially noticeable if the repository consists of many small files. The implementation consists of isomorphic-git + minimal-solid-fs <–> NSS 5.0.0, where I use the Pod directly as the data source, every “fs-call” is forwarded as an HTTP-Request to the Pod.
I like the idea to add the git-http-backend functionalities to NSS.
If I get it to work, I will send a pull request to solid-git, to further investigate both options.