If you believe in free software services enough to build & release a product under this philosophy, why is a proprietary code forge service being used as a slap in the face of the free software philosophy? Is providing a non-corporate-held, non-proprietary a mirror in the TODO column?
I’ve always believed in free software versions and plans, but I only opened my heart to open source about a week ago. Funny enough, my software career began with a decision not to go open source with my first product, choosing a proprietary license instead. Now, after 20 years, life has come full circle, and I’ve come to understand that open source is the only right way to go.
I'm just taking my first steps in this world, and while those steps may seem basic, I truly appreciate your guidance here. Using a non-proprietary GitHub alternative hadn’t crossed my mind, and it seems like a great idea. This week, we're mostly focused on building decent documentation, but I'll add this to my to-do list as a high priority.
Codeberg, Notabug, GitLab, SourceHut are probably the most popular options that are not self-hosted for Git (not that self-hosting is bad). Some of these can even be configured to automatically mirror to give those that care about their privacy or blocked by US sanctions the opportunity to contribute.
This lede seems kind of buried a bit but it looks like this is for creating people-centric workflows instead of yet-another-Airflow, which seems pretty cool to me.
Yes, we are focusing more on the human-in-the-loop aspect of the process, rather than solely orchestrating the software systems behind it (though this can also be achieved through integrations).
In other words, Pneumatic ensures that each task, as part of the workflow sequence, is delivered to the user precisely when it's time for them to take action. This removes the need to constantly monitor a Kanban board and guess what needs attention.
Additionally, it creates a queue of similar tasks, enhancing focus and productivity, such as a list of phone calls to make (complete with pre-filled information) or a list of blog posts to approve.
You are my open-source Godfather ;) Our discussion was one of the final pushes in my long-debated decision to go open source. And your awesome launch of Skyvern on HN today inspired me to make a similar announcement. Thank you for your inspiring work!
I see n8n as an open-source, self-hosted alternative to Zapier, essentially orchestrating how systems communicate with each other. Pneumatic, on the other hand, focuses on human input and helps people navigate complex processes. In fact, many of our existing users use Pneumatic together with Zapier and n8n (mostly in Europe).
ActivePieces seems like a cool product I hadn’t seen before. I’ll need some time to play with it before I can form an opinion.
It helps teams create templates for sequences of tasks. For example:
Step 1. Expense is submitted.
Step 2. Initial review.
Step 3. Direct manager approval.
Step 4. CEO approval.
Step 5. Payment is made.
From the manager's perspective, each task has:
- Its own performer, which can be hardcoded or dynamically assigned based on conditions.
- A clear definition of "done," i.e., a set of data inputs required for task completion, such as file uploads or specific selections.
- Its own dynamic due date, based on variables and conditions.
From the performer's perspective, they receive a convenient list of similar tasks to complete, such as a list of expenses to review, phone calls to make, or customers to interview. They don't need to worry about SOPs, like where to submit information for the next step. They simply hit "complete," and the process moves to the next station or person in the queue. Alternatively, if they hit "return," the task goes back to the previous station.
1. In a nutshell, Asana and Monday are board-based tools suited for project management, where people can see most tasks simultaneously and then choose what to work on.
Pneumatic, on the other hand, builds sequences, so my task only comes to me when it’s time for me to act. This templated sequence can be run repeatedly (manually or triggered by external events) to achieve predictable results.
2. We use Pneumatic to manage our development process :)
If you believe in free software services enough to build & release a product under this philosophy, why is a proprietary code forge service being used as a slap in the face of the free software philosophy? Is providing a non-corporate-held, non-proprietary a mirror in the TODO column?
I’ve always believed in free software versions and plans, but I only opened my heart to open source about a week ago. Funny enough, my software career began with a decision not to go open source with my first product, choosing a proprietary license instead. Now, after 20 years, life has come full circle, and I’ve come to understand that open source is the only right way to go.
I'm just taking my first steps in this world, and while those steps may seem basic, I truly appreciate your guidance here. Using a non-proprietary GitHub alternative hadn’t crossed my mind, and it seems like a great idea. This week, we're mostly focused on building decent documentation, but I'll add this to my to-do list as a high priority.
Which one would you recommend?
Codeberg, Notabug, GitLab, SourceHut are probably the most popular options that are not self-hosted for Git (not that self-hosting is bad). Some of these can even be configured to automatically mirror to give those that care about their privacy or blocked by US sanctions the opportunity to contribute.
This lede seems kind of buried a bit but it looks like this is for creating people-centric workflows instead of yet-another-Airflow, which seems pretty cool to me.
Yes, we are focusing more on the human-in-the-loop aspect of the process, rather than solely orchestrating the software systems behind it (though this can also be achieved through integrations).
In other words, Pneumatic ensures that each task, as part of the workflow sequence, is delivered to the user precisely when it's time for them to take action. This removes the need to constantly monitor a Kanban board and guess what needs attention.
Additionally, it creates a queue of similar tasks, enhancing focus and productivity, such as a list of phone calls to make (complete with pre-filled information) or a list of blog posts to approve.
Great to see you on here Anton!
Just curious, how do you differentiate from other open source competitors like n8n and Active pieces?
Hey Suchintan!
You are my open-source Godfather ;) Our discussion was one of the final pushes in my long-debated decision to go open source. And your awesome launch of Skyvern on HN today inspired me to make a similar announcement. Thank you for your inspiring work!
I see n8n as an open-source, self-hosted alternative to Zapier, essentially orchestrating how systems communicate with each other. Pneumatic, on the other hand, focuses on human input and helps people navigate complex processes. In fact, many of our existing users use Pneumatic together with Zapier and n8n (mostly in Europe).
ActivePieces seems like a cool product I hadn’t seen before. I’ll need some time to play with it before I can form an opinion.
What does this do, exactly?
It helps teams create templates for sequences of tasks. For example:
Step 1. Expense is submitted. Step 2. Initial review. Step 3. Direct manager approval. Step 4. CEO approval. Step 5. Payment is made.
From the manager's perspective, each task has:
- Its own performer, which can be hardcoded or dynamically assigned based on conditions. - A clear definition of "done," i.e., a set of data inputs required for task completion, such as file uploads or specific selections. - Its own dynamic due date, based on variables and conditions.
From the performer's perspective, they receive a convenient list of similar tasks to complete, such as a list of expenses to review, phone calls to make, or customers to interview. They don't need to worry about SOPs, like where to submit information for the next step. They simply hit "complete," and the process moves to the next station or person in the queue. Alternatively, if they hit "return," the task goes back to the previous station.
This looks like an open-source alternative to work management software for work that isn't software development, like Monday.com or Asana.
You're correct, with two small clarifications:
1. In a nutshell, Asana and Monday are board-based tools suited for project management, where people can see most tasks simultaneously and then choose what to work on.
Pneumatic, on the other hand, builds sequences, so my task only comes to me when it’s time for me to act. This templated sequence can be run repeatedly (manually or triggered by external events) to achieve predictable results.
2. We use Pneumatic to manage our development process :)