Clickup is kinda like this (trash software btw) where it combines all these things. Its super cumbersome to deal with all of them in the same UI. For example, you will be chatting with someone, need to look at ticket, you have to completely leave the context of the chat to find the ticket. Yeah you can have multiple tabs, but still cumbersome. Would rather have a chat app for chat, documentation in documentation... so on.
That's exactly how I feel Teams want's me to use it. It's just... dumb, all those "apps" that are integrated, but in reality it's just another super heavy website that you can't easily jump into/out of.
Could you elaborate on what makes Clickup "trash software", is it something specific to Clickup or your opinion around this entire "class" of all-in-one workspace?
ClickUp is known to be extremely slow and buggy, in a way that technical people can infer is a reflection of their mission to literally do everything an organization needs.
Who ever built a piece of quality software by setting out to build multiple otherwise unrelated pieces of software with extremely tight coupling to satisfy enterprise bargain hunting?
> Who ever built a piece of quality software by setting out to build multiple otherwise unrelated pieces of software with extremely tight coupling to satisfy enterprise bargain hunting?
Apparently Lotus Notes did something like that, but I wasn’t around then so I can’t speak to the veracity of that claim.
we evaluated them in 2023, because we wanted to move off JIRA, and their name came up, and we did the initial import, and I spent some time trying to understand what's where and how, and the whole experience was lame. it was aggressively confidently pushing its own features (always be upselling!) but the basics were just not there. It's like Microsoft.
We moved to Linear, which is 2 years younger than ClickUp, but it's solid in what it offers.
IMO we need more sovereign systems like this (this is too simple IMO). Other sovereign systems are complex to deploy. if good FOSS commodity options come up, then we can expect a hosting/deployment infra and companies to setup and offer it for non self-hosters as well - ala WordPress.
That would simplify things, but in my opinion that is still too high a hurdle. I'm all about privacy and FOSS, but I don't self-host anything (except for my personal website).
I wish that more apps would instead move the logic to the client and use files on file syncing services as databases. Taking tasks as an example, if a task board were just a file, I could share it with you on Dropbox / Drive / whatever we both use, and we wouldn't need a dedicated backend at all.
The approach has limitations (conflict resolution, authorization, and latency are the big ones), but it is feasible and actually completely fine for lots of apps.
Can I drag an email directly onto a Kanban or a Todo list, and prioritize it like a task, and then click on the card or task to go directly to the mail message, in the context of its thread?
No, and probably won't be. Each tool is intentionally standalone. You can link to things manually but there's no cross-tool wiring. I'd rather keep the codebase simple and each tool easy to understand on its own.
> No licensee or downstream recipient may use the Software (including any modified or derivative versions) to directly compete with the original Licensor by offering it to third parties as a hosted, managed, or Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) product or cloud service where the primary value of the service is the functionality of the Software itself.
No thanks. These “almost-but-not-quite-FOSS” licenses are a blight.
OSD !== Open Source. All OSD is Open Source, not all Open Source is OSD. You are free to disagree, but the OSI has chosen (more accurately forced to choose) very explicitly to only define and trademark OSD. There's really not much more to the conversation then that.
Maybe you're right, but FSL/BSL is arguably "more open source" than GPL. We all know GPL is a poison pill that kills commercial use, while FSL/BSL just blocks competitors from stealing your app.
That's not even remotely true. GPL does not prevent any commercial use, when others (like BSL or the O'Sassy license here) explicitly prevent commercial use...
Are you kidding me? If you link against a GPL library in a proprietary commercial app, the GPL's copyleft infects that code and you'd have to release it under GPL.
Explain to me how that doesn't prevent commercial use? Are you going to say "well technically it doesn't prevent it"? No one cares. Commercial projects avoid GPL like the plague.
Fair point, I've actually just switched to MIT as of today. This is a personal project I've been building for myself and I want to share it with anyone who finds it useful.
The confusing thing for me related to that was Try Free which leads me to look for pricing. But with only Try free I get suspicious of even private or small team.
If it’s free for use. Try is a confusing term.
Off topic, I’d really wish any service or product with tiers would have pricing in a discoverable way.
> They could released a Chrome extension to let users configure their links for each of those apps. Wasted effort.
This app isn't just some link aggregator or an admin dashboard, though. It's workplace software that hosts all your data, self-hosted on your system of choice if you wish. I'm neither a user of nor am I affiliated with this project, but it seems like there's the aspiration to provide a unified client interface for every app, and it looks like you could BYOC as well (for CalDAV and Email).
Because I wanted everything on my own server, in one database, under my control. A bunch of pinned tabs to different SaaS apps is a completely different thing. But fair enough, if that works for you, you don't need this.
I want to know why this [0] needed to be co-authored by Claude. Especially because it seems like the kind of change you'd explicitly want to make without Claude's "help" (presuming that's how that got in there).
Asking Claude to commit and push triggers the Co-Authored-By thing typically, even if the change was made by hand. It could entirely be possible the author just asked it to generate a commit message for this change (although the style doesn't strike me as very Claude like).
I use Claude to help me code. I'm a solo developer and this is a side project, AI helps me move faster on things I'd otherwise not get to. The code is all reviewed and tested by me before it ships. I understand the skepticism though.
That’s all well and good, but you can’t enforce a license on it. Code written by an AI is in the public domain. So the license you’re using is essentially meaningless, and anyone can do anything they want with the code.
Blocking AI users on github is such a quick way to avoid most slop and get advanced notice when an existing project has started going into tech/cognitive debt.
You'll get a warning banner for those repos if you go to these users and block them:
This seems exactly not what you want. If fully invested in this, you never have the freedom to switch tools, ie go to a different team chat solution. The benefits of having these apps in one UI / ecosystem are relatively small: files - teamchat makes sense, but todo-email, kanban-recpies doesn't add any value.
Like samdixon mentions with ClickUp, the downside is quite large UX wise: you'd be constantly switching context witin dobase. Having 10 pinned tabs for all your tools is very convenient, checking a todo while working on an email in dobase feels messy.
I actually rather dislike having my info spread over a gazillion services, all of them having their own paid accounts or advertising. Also, a single unified search for all communication and shared notes would be very helpful.
Also, I'm not familiar with ClickUp nor Dobase, but I imagine you can have them open in multiple tabs, allowing for your preferred way of working?
i registered for their demo and it seems to be unable to do any of the advertised features. nearly everything crashes; feels like a ux wireframe not yet wired it
That's strange. I use it daily myself and some of my clients do too (to communicate with me). The main tools work reasonably well for us. There are definitely rough edges and bugs still, it's a one-person project.