The federated code forge

(tangled.org)

103 points | by zlliang 2 hours ago

11 comments

  • stryan 1 hour ago
    Really looking forward to seeing Tangled develop! I've got a side project that's main repo and CI is on my self-hosted Gitea but code and releases are mirrored to Github; I'm hoping to move it off Gitea and onto Tangled for code/releases/potentially CI and just keep Github for discoverability/backups/namespace "squatting". Just need git-bug to add a Tangled bridge so I can keep issues synced and (ideally) for there to be instructions for running the client self-hosted. It doesn't have to be a full featured client but I also don't want to be SOL for web visibility if the main Tangled appview is down.

    One musing: I did run into my first "issue" with federated Git hosting the other day while setting up Neovim on a new machine. One of the plugins I use is hosted on Tangled and I guess its backing Knot was down. This was awkward for two reasons:

    1. It as unclear to me from the Tangled website the backing knot was the issue (for a while I thought it was something on my end)

    2. I really had no backup plans for something like a Neovim plugin's source forge being down and, clearly, neither did the Neovim package manager as it just kept showing an error on every session I started with no way to fix it :).

    I suppose in the long run we really shouldn't be assuming that code storage is just Always There or easily cached somewhere, but I anticipate some growing pains in the mean time. ATProto doesn't seem to have the benefit ActivityPub has where if the instance I wanted to view content on was down I can usually find some other instance that's gotten the messages.

    • icy 1 hour ago
      > I suppose in the long run we really shouldn't be assuming that code storage is just Always There or easily cached somewhere, but I anticipate some growing pains in the mean time.

      Pretty much. We want to make running your own git remotes as easy as possible. Lets you scale on your own too.

      > ATProto doesn't seem to have the benefit ActivityPub has where if the instance I wanted to view content on was down I can usually find some other instance that's gotten the messages.

      It does give you (or anybody) the ability to index this data independently, and not miss messages -- which AP doesn't afford. Different tradeoffs!

      • embedding-shape 1 hour ago
        > It does give you (or anybody) the ability to index this data independently, and not miss messages -- which AP doesn't afford. Different tradeoffs!

        Someone (or some group) could also in theory go fully content-addressing with their data store, and make content available based on their hash, effectively layering that missing benefit on top of the existing architecture. Someone could probably vibecode this together in some hour(s) :)

    • nerdypepper 1 hour ago
      > I really had no backup plans for something like a Neovim plugin's source forge being down

      this problem could exist with any package manager, the go package manager is one example, where it allows specifying packages from any git url. we host a mirror of all git repositories on our infra, and serve that when the backing knot is down. you could choose to trust that and pull from there (verifying that the tarball has a known correct hash), the way the go package manager pulls from proxy.golang.org.

  • icy 2 hours ago
    Hi! Tangled co-founder here. We're super stoked with this launch -- we've stabilized our AT Protocol lexicons, completely overhauled our architecture and UI, and made self-hosting the entire stack (or parts of it!) incredibly easy. We've also shipped support for organizations, and have private repos rolling out in the following couple weeks.

    Happy to answer any questions at all.

    • kstrauser 2 hours ago
      I’m excited about this direction. I’ve moved most of my own projects onto my own Forgejo, but miss it being easy for remote strangers to open PRs and such without registering in my system, which I have zero desire to allow.

      So what’s the state of Tangled today? Say I have a Tangled server (instance? host?) up and running with my repos. Some stranger wants to contribute. What do they have to do before they can open issues or send PRs or whatever?

      • icy 2 hours ago
        That's exactly the problem we want to solve. Of course, they still need identity of some kind -- in this case, they'll need an AT Protocol account -- either by self-hosting a Personal Data Server[0], or signing up with a provider such as Tangled or Bluesky/Blacksky, etc. This is the last ever account they'll need (and it's theirs, and portable!). They can then begin contributing; they'll use this same account for all of Tangled and other AT Protocol services.

        Your Tangled git server that you'd want to run is a 'knot'[1]. It's not exactly analogous to Forgejo because it's headless, but that makes it super light on resources to run.

        [0]: https://atproto.com/guides/the-at-stack#pds [1]: https://tangled.org/docs/knots/self-hosting/

        • kstrauser 1 hour ago
          Got it. I'm still trying slightly unsuccessfully to wrap my head around this, but I've run a Mastodon instance for about 10 years and it took me a little while to wrap my head around that, too.

          This is great. I'm delighted at the idea of having my own knot hosting my projects, talking to my friend's knot, and coordinating on a global project's knot, all without having to lock everyone into one centralized point of failure (even mine). Amazing. I love it!

      • nerdypepper 2 hours ago
        all they would need is an atproto account. you can get one of these on Tangled itself, or bring your own. they can then open issues on your repository.

        soon, repos will be able to declare a contribution policy: presently its open to all (anybody can open an issue), but owners can choose to limit this to just contributors for example.

        • kstrauser 1 hour ago
          How soon will that be, do you suppose? It's not a blocker for most of my projects, but I can think of a few that I'd like to keep more closed (while still making them publicly cloneable). That doesn't keep me from using Tangled today for the open repos. It just means I'd need to have at least a couple of sharing setups - Tangled plus Forgejo - going at the same time for a while.

          Also, will Tangled support private repos that are only visible or fetchable to specific people? Would that even make sense in its model?

          • nerdypepper 1 hour ago
            for collaboration policies: its already part of the protocol, just needs to be baked into the flagship client!

            private repos are coming very soon, we have a working demo of private repositories.

    • 0x457 1 hour ago
      Are there plans to add http(s) support to knot? I was planning on hosting my own knot at home, but didn't want to expose my home IP (I use cloudflared for other services that need to be exposed)
    • HumanOstrich 2 hours ago
      I wanted to try this but when I signed up for a BlueSky account it was immediately banned by some automation. I appealed but never heard back.
      • nerdypepper 1 hour ago
        don't need to signup for bsky to try out Tangled however, you can directly just signup for an account with Tangled.
    • jauntywundrkind 14 minutes ago
      One of my biggest questions about the forged about is what kind of CI (and somewhat CD) do they offer?

      What can I expect as a developer using Tangled to build (and deploy) my app? What is the native platform? What are typical other CI systems that have been adapted to work on Tangled (Dagger, Drone, whatnot, especially if there are repos to demonstrate the adaption)? What can I expect as enterprise or lone developer using Tangled or self-hosting or federation?

    • embedding-shape 1 hour ago
      > made self-hosting the entire stack (or parts of it!) incredibly easy

      Back when you first launched, I thought running a knot was already pretty easy :) Could you expand on how it's different now, and what part(s) aren't now easy to self-host, if there is any?

      • nerdypepper 1 hour ago
        self-hosting the appview was a bit trickier back then, but we have worked towards making that trivial. it now runs entirely in-memory, and is completely stateless (rebuilds the state of the network from scratch each time).

        https://tangled.org/docs/self-hosting/indexer/

        we have also stabilized lexicons, so if you are a selfhoster, you can expect to not require a breaking upgrade!

  • ivanjermakov 39 minutes ago
    Finnish startup Tangled raises €3.8M to reinvent code collaboration https://www.vestbee.com/insights/articles/tangled-raises-3-8...
    • paaloeye 6 minutes ago
      What's the business model here and how do they play to return the investment? It's aint easy to compete with GitHub...
  • paaloeye 53 minutes ago
    tangled.org has potential.

    Pre-update, code review UI was horrific compared to GitHub. Post-update, code review is much better, but "Comments" section without a "Comment" button is unforgivable. People are probably closing PRs right and left without knowing it. Shift-Enter is a submit action.

    I'm a keyboard-first user, but for something which can end up in somebody's inbox notifications, UI button is the way to go.

    I just don't understand how such a prolific pattern is being ignored.

  • gnabgib 2 hours ago
    Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto (332 points, 2025, 86 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45543899
  • pksunkara 49 minutes ago
    I see in the post that lexicon has been finalized. Does that include putting the issue, pr & comment records under the repo scope instead of the user scope?

    I am asking because I have been waiting for that change. I intend to make all the public repos from https://juju.bi (code forge I am building) interoperable with Tangled and basically behave as knot server.

    • icy 48 minutes ago
      Indeed. Repos own issues and pulls now! We will publish a post on how we do this very soon (hint: we store them as git objects within the repository and project them as an AT Protocol MST -- hence making knots PDS-like).
  • huksley 1 hour ago
    Is the private repo support possible when self hosted?
    • jon-wood 1 hour ago
      Not currently, Tangled's data model is entirely built around Atproto, which at least at the moment assumes everything posted is public. There's work in progress at the moment to layer access controlled data on top of that which I think Tangled could use with time though.
      • nerdypepper 1 hour ago
        we have already got a working demo of private repositories that works very similarly to atproto spaces alpha, but without requiring spaces to be stabilized, we will have something to show off in the next couple weeks :)
  • mbStavola 2 hours ago
    I honestly love Tangled.

    At this point it's really the only forge I want to use going forward, considering that it sits nicely alongside all my other social data with ATProto.

  • LelouBil 53 minutes ago
    I really like ATProto as an interoperable protocol for social applications !
  • max-privatevoid 57 minutes ago
    For a federated system they sure talk a lot about their struggles around scaling centralized infrastructure. ATProto seems like it's entirely the wrong protocol for this sort of application.
    • LelouBil 56 minutes ago
      ATProto is the right protocol for the social elements imo
      • verdverm 18 minutes ago
        Having worked on it for a while, I now disagree. The permission primitives should be baked in from the start rather than the bolted on after spaces because people continued to ask for these things and eventually Bluesky came around. There are many use cases for permissioned data and experiences that have to be built outside of the protocol, leading to fragmentation and loss of interoperability.
    • jauntywundrkind 42 minutes ago
      > For a federated system they sure talk a lot about their struggles around scaling centralized infrastructure. ATProto seems like it's entirely the wrong protocol for this sort of application.

      Huh that's surprising to hear? What makes you think that? It feels like the whole point of this release is to make it easier to allow people to self host or federate whatever parts they want? That's what I got from their intro/opener!:

      > But the centralised forge is crumbling. Relying on someone else for uptime, for features, and to be a good steward of your code hasn’t played out well. What has stood the test of time is email: Git to move the code, and email — an open protocol — to talk about it. At the cost of user experience, however.

      > But the centralised forge is crumbling. Relying on someone else for uptime, for features, and to be a good steward of your code hasn’t played out well. What has stood the test of time is email: Git to move the code, and email — an open protocol — to talk about it. At the cost of user experience, however.

      > Tangled aims to give you the best of both: the longevity of an open protocol, with the convenience and polish of a proper forge.

      > It’s the first truly federated code forge — you can host code on your own servers and still collaborate seamlessly with others. Our approach is pragmatic: self-host just the parts you want, like Git hosting or CI runners, or all of it, including the API server and UI. Whatever you choose, you can still talk to everyone else.

      The comment here from @icy emphasizes similar ability to let whomever host whatever parts of this they please:

      > Hi! Tangled co-founder here. We're super stoked with this launch -- we've stabilized our AT Protocol lexicons, completely overhauled our architecture and UI, and made self-hosting the entire stack (or parts of it!) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50306205

      I don't see any mention of "their struggles around scaling centralized infrastructure". Is that just typical run of the mill low grade slander attack we see against atproto, more reflexive negativity? Or is there some actual interesting point here, that is perhaps even relevant to this tangled release?

  • rebolek 1 hour ago
    I would really love to use it but when are you going to support SHA256? I have SHA256 repo and I don’t want to rewrite all history especially when Git 3 is moving to SHA256 anyway.
    • icy 1 hour ago
      We already do.
    • nerdypepper 1 hour ago
      selfhosted knots default to sha256.