Detach this repo / New name

[rugk]

Can you please detach this repo from the not maintained fork?

You can either do it manually or (which I recommend) just contact the GitHub support to do it for you.

This allows search in this repo and it just looks much nicer.

[Mikaela]

Can you please detach this repo from the not maintained fork?

You mean upstream?

You can either do it manually

AFAIK this removes all not-repo history (issues, PRs, etc.).

[nitmir]

Just by curiosity, why do you want to detach it ?

Currently, by going on https://github.com/sebsauvage/ZeroBin/network one can see that this repo is the most active fork. If the repo is detached, is this also lost ?

[Mikaela]

Currently, by going on https://github.com/sebsauvage/ZeroBin/network one can see that this repo is the most active fork. If the repo is detached, is this also lost ?

Yes and also attribution to the original author/repo. I think better idea would be rename ZeroBin to something else which would point out that this is fork which is advanced further.

[rugk]

Just by curiosity, why do you want to detach it ?

It e.g. allows you to search in this fork (which is then a main repo) and as the original repo is discontinued anyway linking to it on every page does not make sense.

Yes and also attribution to the original author/repo.

Just put it into the Readme.

[rugk]

AFAIK this removes all not-repo history (issues, PRs, etc.).

Yes, that's why I don't recommend this way. :smiley:

[elrido]

Personally I would prefer it to keep the repo linked to the upstream, even if it is currently unmaintained. I use the network frequently to check on other active forks and like the "advertising" effect it has as @nitmir mentioned.

But I too think this fork should probably be renamed to avoid any confusion or misunderstanding. As Seb stated himself, this fork has changed quite drastically from the original minimalism (most code in the index.php, etc.).

The only reason I have not yet renamed the fork is that I haven’t yet come up with a name. Suggestions would be very welcome!

Regarding searching in this repo: I didn't realise that there is this restriction, as I was usually using grep on the shell or the built in full text search in my Eclipse IDE.

If we had a new name, we could set up a new "organisation" with that one new repository (not forked from this, but cloned into a blank new one), do all the renaming and then only I would need to update both repos (which I can automate). This way we could use the search, wiki, ticketing, etc. in that "organisation" (and I am glad to add anybody’s account who wants to work a bit on it, too) while users of the original would have a way to track the work via the network.

[rugk]

Suggestions would be very welcome!

I think we should keep "bin" in the name. So e.g.:

• AmnesiaBin (eh... tails...)
• 0kBin ("0 knowledge" - I admit this looks like 0 kB)
• BinDrop
• ZBin (from "zero")
• ...

Well... I hope you come up with better suggestions... :innocent:

Note that the name 0Bin is already taken.

[elrido]

I see that you see my problem. :grin:

How about some kind of suffix?

• ZeroBinFork
• ZeroBinNg
• ZeroBinMod
• ZeroBin++

etc.

[rugk]

What about

• Zerobin2
• ZeroBinX
• ZeroB
• 0BStore
• ZeroCloud
• BinCloud Zero
• ...

[rugk]

I am still in favour of detaching this repo. Here is how we can do it to fulfil your requests:

• I've already added a link to the original repo, so we credit the original author.
• Going on I think we should get @sebsauvage into adding a note to the Readme that the repo is discontinued (as it obviously is) and link to this repo so users know where to go. This caused some confusion for me too..
• Afterwards we have a much better "advertisement" than a small link on the contributors page and therefore we can detach this repo...

[elrido]

Ok, lets do this then. About the name: cipherbin?

As you say the "bin" part is the clear connection to a pastebin service, but the "zero" part, which relates to "zero knowledge", is not that clear and possibly misleading.

Any better ideas or good reasons against that name?

[pozzo-balbi]

How about privatebin?

[rugk]

As you say the "bin" part is the clear connection to a pastebin service, but the "zero" part, which relates to "zero knowledge", is not that clear and possibly misleading.

As for me I see both parts clearly connected.

Ok, lets do this then.

As for detaching, I think the difficult thing is to get a link to this project into the upstream Readme. Does anybody know what @sebsauvage does? Alternatively we could of course spam the issues there,... :expressionless:

How about privatebin?

Or SecureBin... <-- No that's already taken.

[duramato]

Giving my personal experience, I found this repo by taking a look at the forks of the original project, and this one was one of the most active. So unless you can get this linked in the original project as a fork/predecessor etc I don't think it would by very wise to detach it yet

[elrido]

@duramato The idea would be to still keep this fork and for me to update it, but to have the main issue tracker, wiki, etc. in the detached repository. This repo would of course link to the new project.

Regarding links from the original project to the new fork: We can ask, his email address is available, but I would not bet on any changes to happen. What we can do is write to some media that had originally published news about Zerobin and inform them of the fork in the hopes that they publish an update on it (i.e. heise.de in Germany).

Regarding the name: I have set up a doodle with the suggestions so far. Sorry for the ads on that page and please use something random for the name. I really don't like to decide this on my own and then be blamed for a silly name. :-p I'll wait until Friday evening for the poll results and then do the cloning / migration during the weekend.

Edit (@rugk): Please use the Croodle linked below!

[duramato]

One name suggestion i have is ZeroBeen , in a mocky way of the original name

[rugk]

Zero:honeybee:? Seriously? :laughing:

Regarding the name: I have set up a doodle with the suggestions so far.

Could you please use Croodle? It's really the sister (or brother?) of ZeroBin... :sunglasses: I have a instance of it running if you need one.

[elrido]

Sure, set one up and share the link. The options I used were:

0BStore
0kBin
AmnesiaBin
BinCloud Zero
BinDrop
cipherbin
privatebin
ZBin
ZeroB
ZeroBee
ZeroBeen
ZeroBin++
Zerobin2
ZeroBinFork
ZeroBinMod
ZeroBinNg
ZeroBinX
ZeroCloud

(I added ZeroBee(n) to the list, its wacky but it would make a nice logo)

[rugk]

[poll closed]

[rugk]

The idea would be to still keep this fork and for me to update it, but to have the main issue tracker, wiki, etc. in the detached repository. This repo would of course link to the new project.

I would also move the code to the new repo and (maybe?) create a GitHub organisation for it? (with the same way name as the new one of ZeroBin) So that this repo here will only consist of a Readme linking to the new project.

[mro]

0🐝n

[rugk]

We still need more votes here. So come on. Let's vote for you favourite name: :pointright: [poll closed]_

(However please don't double-vote...)

[jelhan]

I don't think detaching now would be a problem. There isn't a big community around ZeroBin yet. A notice in an issue at original repo should be enough. It's not about users to find the fork but about administrators and I guess everybody how checks the network graph will also have a look at issue list.

I would recommend a speaking name which gives an idea what this piece of software offers. Also it should be understandable for ordinary people. "Bin" is to technically in my opinion. I think it should be more something like "share" or "paste".

Thanks for using croodle by the way.

[elrido]

@jelhan I will keep this repo updated with the same codebase as the detached one to ensure it is still found in the network graph. Issues and wiki here will be migrated to the new repo and I will keep on forwarding any issues opened here to the new one and also continue to answer on issues created in the original ZeroBin repo if I can help.

[rugk]

"Bin" is to technically in my opinion. I think it should be more something like "share" or "paste".

Share is a good idea. ZeroShare/PrivateShare/... Unfortunately this is not in the poll... :expressionless:

[rugk]

@elrido So you would duplicate the code. Or even store the code in one repo and other things (issues, ...) in another one? I don't think that's a good idea. Just replace all code here with a simple Readme file pointing to the new repo. This way this repo here is still shown in the network/contributor graph and users can find it. All other things should be moved to ZeroBin/ZeroBin e.g.

Maintaining code in two repos is just laborious and splitting the issues from the rest of the code is more than ugly. (If you want to do the latter I would rather stick to the current situation)

As said - and I agree with @jelhan in this case - also an issue in the old repo would be sufficient IMHO. I doubt somebody can overlook a CAPSLOCK "THIS REPO IS OUTDATED/UNMAINTAINED!!!!" when it appears as the newest issue. :wink: Additionally there is already an open issue there - however "only" at position 3 and without capslock in the title.

[elrido]

Issues wiki and all should be kept in the new repo of course. I can disable the issue tracker here after migrating them all.

Pushing the code to two instead of one upstream repos is not really a burden and if it would ever start to annoy me I could just wrap up the two commands into one shell script in my ~/bin.

There is a benefit in keeping the code updated in here. Apart from the member list I also like to check the network view to see which repo was recently updated to find possibly interesting feature branches to integrate. I found the favicons, file upload, password protection and other features in this way. And others might find this repo in that fashion as being the most actively maintained.

Regarding name: I like "share" instead of "bin", too. Lets see what the poll says in Friday evening. If there are not many votes and we could look at the popular ones adapt it, i.e. privateShare, amnesiaShare, cipherShare, etc.

[rugk]

I also like to check the network view to see which repo was recently updated to find possibly interesting feature branches to integrate.

Well.. you are already alone in this graph and this won't change - even if this repo is not updated anymore. And the date does really not matter - everybody can see that it is much newer than the original repo. So if this is your only argument to keep the code here this is a weak argument. You don't have to be in all graphes of the old repo. I've also opened a PR to get a note into the Readme. I am not very confident that he'll react, but it is a try. I also dropped him a mail.

Also if we additionally open an issue it is really unnecessary to care about such (deeply hidden) graphs somewhere. The issue page is the first thing I look on when I see the repo is outdated.

[nitmir]

Pushing the code to two instead of one upstream repos is not really a burden and if it would ever start to annoy me I could just wrap up the two commands into one shell script in my ~/bin.

This can be done automatically by editing the .git/config of the local repository. For instance:

[remote "origin"]
        url = git@github.com:elrido/ZeroBin.git
        fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
        pushurl = git@github.com:elrido/ZeroBin.git
        pushurl = git@gitlab.crans.org:elrido/ZeroBin.git

git pull will fetch from github.com and git push will both puth to github.com and gitlab.crans.org.

[elrido]

The name PrivateBin was choosen and the new repo created. I'm currently migrating all the stuff there.

[rugk]

As everything is done I am closing this.

[rugk]

For reference here are the result of the poll: