this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2025
5 points (100.0% liked)

Request creation of free software missing from the 🄯ommons 🗽🐧🐏

16 readers
1 users here now

This is a place to ask whether free open source software exists for a particular purpose. If it’s non-existent, specify your software requirements here so your dream can be well articulated for everyone to either laugh at or share the dream and give moral support for you to create it yourself. Or you might even to pitch the idea so well that a developer loves the idea enough to run off and build it for you.

No other community exists for this purpose but there are some loosely related ones. If existing software closely delivers what you need but is missing a feature, you might post a wishlist/feature request here or in !bugs@sopuli.xyz.

The FSF has a software directory that can help with finding software.

Loosely related decentralised communities generally for FOSS:

There is also foss@beehaw.org but I don’t recommend it because the mod is trigger happy with censorship. E.g. if you post about FOSS advocacy it will get removed as it does not relate to any particular FOSS application. There are also many more FOSS forums duplicated in centralised places which are not conducive to the digital rights spirit of free open source software, so they are omitted.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://libretechni.ca/post/617678

The shitshow is largely described here. That’s LaTeX-focused, but the whole FOSS infra is a disaster.

We need an app that can harvest bug reports from multiple sources and build a local database that aggregates all bug reports. That is, it harvests bug reports in github, gnu.org, Salsa, as well as distro-specific reports (e.g. Ubuntu bug reports from launchpad and Debian bug reports from debian.org).

Rationale

  • Dupe reports (due to lazy people)-- Some trigger-happy testers/users do not bother to lookup whether a bug is already reported. And most of the rest only check one db, not all.
  • Dupe reports (by design)-- The Debian guidance is to report bugs to the Debian bug tracker (to some extent, even if the bug is already reported upstream). If not upstream, it’s the maintainer’s job to mirror it upstream. It’s a good policy but diligent testers who check multiple trackers see some distracting redundancy.
  • Query limitations-- searching for bug reports is limited to the GUI search form for each DB, each of which is limited in different ways. Just let me fucking grep.
  • Offline users fucked-- Bug DBs are naturally online, so air-gapped/offline users have no access to the bug DB. A local DB that can be sync’d from bug trackers when the user is momentarily online.
  • Full searching-- a local copy of all bug tracker datasets enables testers to search all records with a single query.
no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here