Yes your right. The output of those different phases should be consolidated so you just see the status per relay / git / grasp server.

I totally agree. Unless you need dowload every file in a repository for some reason this is much better. It uses a fraction of the bandwidth and is really quick.

I thought about doing this to make 's favourite and 's least favourite client at the same time

Fantastic to see this coming together

So your needs are: 1) basic Issue / PR flow with good review tooling 2) moderation tools 3) CI tooling? Have I missed anything?

With ngit, nostr events are synced to a db within the .git directory. Also GRASP-05 enables archive servers that mirror repositories the operstor cares about. This enables repository data to always be publically available even if the services the maintainers choose go down.

As said you can use any git server you want or host it yourself. Grasp is designed to enable users and projects to either self host, use grasp services offered by individuals or teams in their network or use public free or paid servers. The idea is thst projects use multiple grasp services at the same time whic sync up to provides reduncancy. Its also really simple for maintainers to switch service providers by updating a single event.

quote from https://radicle.xyz/guides/seeder : "While a peer-to-peer network without seed nodes is feasible, it is impractical. This is because regular “user” nodes go online and offline all the time, so finding a user from which to download a certain piece of content can be challenging, or even impossible if all users with that content are offline. Therefore, a healthy peer-to-peer network necessitates at least some highly available nodes that participate in the network like regular peers, but seldom go offline. These are called seed nodes."

last time i checked in on the project it mainly worked through 'seed' nodes which are analogus to relays because p2p was proving so unreliable. I'm not sure how much more decentralised it is in reality.

Hi , I'm the creator of gitworkshop, gnit and grasp. A combination of relay an client tools can provide the provide this sort of moderation and control for projects that desire it, but the maturity of git nostr isn't really there yet. Whilst the majority of a project community would likely use these tools that support this moderation, the conversation can spill over into the wider nostr ecosystem and clients built / used that don't enforce this moderation. This is the trade-off using an open protocol thats easy to build on.