Mbin is a decentralized content aggregator, voting, discussion and microblogging platform running on the fediverse network. It can communicate with many other ActivityPub services, including Kbin, Mastodon, Lemmy, Pleroma, Peertube. It is an open source alternative to other link aggregator services like Reddit. The initiative aims to promote a free and open internet.
Mbin is focused on what the community wants, pull requests can be merged by any repo owner (with merge rights in GitHub). Discussions take place on Matrix then consensus has to be reached by the community. If approved by the community, only one approval on the PR is required by one of the Mbin maintainers. It’s built entirely on trust.
It seems it’s claim to fame is being more open and accepting of community changes and improvements. It can install as either bare metal/VM or as a Docker container.
Although anyone can install it and self-host it, their project page also contains a link to various instances that already exist and which anyone can register on.
See https://github.com/MbinOrg/mbin
#technology #opensource #Fediverse #linkaggregator #decentralised
My understanding of the situation is that Ernest, the main developer behind Kbin, thinks of the current Kbin as a proof of concept, and he is doing profound rewriting of the codebase to better fit his vision of how it should be working.
Meanwhile, other people wanted to contribute to Kevin directly, developing a better product on top of what Ernest considers to be too shaky foundations. So he’s not all that interested in pursuing that part of the development before he is happy with the core.
This also leads to a dynamic where he still has his own vision for the project and it goes through him, whereas other contributors want to make it their own more and develop something different.
It’s hard to see how to make everyone happy here without forking. Hopefully both projects can still gain from each other in the future: Mbin can benefit from the rewritten codebase of Kbin, and Kbin can implement features from Mbin after seeing that they are good and work well. In either case, the continued development as separate projects is probably not all that bad.
That makes sense!
For my basic knowledge working side by side with a lot of devs, I totally agree with the way Ernest thinks. It’s essential for a product that’s growing up to have a solid core that will not need to be rewrote in the near future.
But also, as an user, I keep wishing we could see more features, like the API for mobile apps.
I mean, besides what Ernest and Melroy thinks that’s the right way, there’s also what the users need, what the users want and what the project needs to escalate (new features vs core rewriting). And probably there’s not a right answer for that.