I dig this idea. I have the sneaking suspicion that GitHub Gists aren’t a first-class citizen of the overall GitHub product. I tried navigating to mine the other day and found myself ejecting to a search engine to find them. And then wondering if they are something I can trust to be around in the future.
I use Gists as a way to stash lists publicly. I’m curious what use cases for Gists exist beyond the obvious “here’s a snippet” (which is valuable in and of itself!).
At first I was like this interesting but I don't see this as more than a hobby project. Then I did some more reading and it turns out they recently raised 5.5M (seed round). I guess if they can become the next place for people to dump code for ML, I can see how they were able to raise.
Yeah, Gists don't feel like they've had much attention in a very long time.
I still love them as a product and use them on a daily basis, and there's nothing that feels particularly missing from them, but they're clearly not something GitHub are investing a lot of effort in beyond keeping them working at the moment.
This is awsome bc Github Gist links aren't Cool URL's and break on name changes even though repo's don't and Gist's have those hash ID's. I don't know that the Styles need be quite so on-the-nose, though I am glad to see syntax highlighting is already in.
I think this is awesome, but I do not see the use case: Why would anybody register on my site to publish his or her gists? I would love to get my gists from Github published under my site, but for this case I would prefer a static site generator (hugo, jekyll) with a good theme for gists.
Now this had me curious. Is there someone out there who has actually created a theme/template website for a static site generator like Hugo, Zola, or Jekyll where you could use both the usual markdown and the actual code files themselves? It seems fairly doable based off the templating engines available.
On the other hand, Docker seems to be a bit overkill for something one could use a static site for instead if it's supposed to be self-hosted. It's even better security-wise. Otherwise, I wonder if one could upload a gist and have it run on the server through some unknown exploit.
Readit News
It's a better interface for editing / creating GitHub gists.
Login with GitHub, get a list of gists, get a full blown CodeMirror-based editor. Preview for markdown files.
And it's open-source: https://github.com/kjk/tools.arslexis.io/tree/main/frontend/...
Built mostly with Svelte 4 and a tiny bit of Go backend.
I use Gists as a way to stash lists publicly. I’m curious what use cases for Gists exist beyond the obvious “here’s a snippet” (which is valuable in and of itself!).
I still love them as a product and use them on a daily basis, and there's nothing that feels particularly missing from them, but they're clearly not something GitHub are investing a lot of effort in beyond keeping them working at the moment.
If they work and there's nothing missing, what effort would they put into them?
In the beginning I saw it as just a convenient pastebin service associated with the git service, for single files and quick sharing.
It seems overkill to create a repo. When people make gists that are like 2-3 files they should just make a repo.
On the other hand, Docker seems to be a bit overkill for something one could use a static site for instead if it's supposed to be self-hosted. It's even better security-wise. Otherwise, I wonder if one could upload a gist and have it run on the server through some unknown exploit.