←back to thread

578 points smusamashah | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
huijzer ◴[] No.42463359[source]
I really think we are as developers underusing setups like this. If you could somehow figure out a simple but effective sync between devices then that would be able to cover many use-cases.

Maybe we just need an sqlite with better support for replicas? Then people have one tiny server with a bunch of sqlite’s to which the apps can sync?

replies(10): >>42463533 #>>42463581 #>>42463651 #>>42463678 #>>42464303 #>>42464442 #>>42464633 #>>42469937 #>>42476545 #>>42479191 #
evantbyrne ◴[] No.42463533[source]
For something as simple as this a manual export/import would be the most appropriate. Probably not a strong foundation for a communication tool.
replies(1): >>42463674 #
latexr ◴[] No.42463674[source]
> manual export/import

That would mean manual busywork every time you start/end a session. If you ever forget one of those steps, your work becomes out of sync and that’s extra work to sort it out. Depending on when you notice, it may take you several hours to fix. Not having to do things manually is what computers are for.

replies(1): >>42463780 #
1. evantbyrne ◴[] No.42463780[source]
You could build a sync feature that requires some background process on each client along with likely complex configuration for peer-to-peer sharing, or you could build a web backend that runs on a server. There are good reasons why everyone does the latter.