Maybe there were days when all Usenet servers had all hierarchies. I’m probably too young.

In a way, Lemmy is essentially a reimplementation of Usenet. Decentralized, federated forums.

Usenet was never really “federated”. All servers mirror slightly different hierarchies (with the free ones usually focusing on text and the commercial ones focusing on binary files).

What server do you use?

I’ve been a happy user of Eternal September (the name alone was awesome enough!) for quite some time now.

I still use it as forums. That’s what it can do best.

I wish Usenet wasn‘t misunderstood as a file sharing network anymore.

Unlikely, as even NeoMutt (which could improve it) still does it quite manually.

But multi-account usage in Mutt is really… leaving room for improvement.

I am one of those weirdos who prefer the best tool for a job, not the most popular one. And Git is - for me and my projects with exactly one branch (“trunk”) and three or four other contributors, with me being the BDFL - the worst choice.

It sure is! Glad I’m not alone. :-)

Makes sense.

Which VCS capabilities make Git stand out in comparison to all other DVCSs if you don’t need a web UI?

Both Mercurial and Git started around the same time as a replacement for BitKeeper - which also was decentralised.

So, Fossil is perfect?

Mercurial is decentralised, there is no single “source of truth”. (Not counting “upstream”, of course.)

Git is quite powerful on its own with version control, diffs, branches, merging, etc.

All version control systems do that, hence my question.

Git was conceived as a bazaar (because of its use for the Linux kernel), but most projects are more like cathedrals. In my opinion, Git is simply over-engineered for most projects. For projects that you don’t want to share with others, even CVS would probably suffice…

There is a difference between “not using a VCS” and “using Git”.

There is a difference between “not using a VCS” and “using Git”.

Why use Git at all then? I thought the one reason why everyone wants to use Git these days are the forges.

Which makes Darwin a system with BSD elements, just like some versions of Windows and all versions of Linux. Windows and Linux aren’t BSDs, I think you agree; neither is Darwin, for the same reason.

The kernel is not BSD. That’s like running GNU software on a BSD kernel: It’s still not a Linux.

Good idea. Try and report back. If it does not work, sorry!