Linkwarden and Wallabag are both excellent. Omnivore is up and coming, but might still be difficult to selfhost.

Different caller, same question.

The BSDs I’ve used are extremely well documented and cohesive. No basic tools or functions are missing and everything works very simply and together as a whole. The tooling they put forward in the 2000s like DTrace, ZFS, jails, bhyve, were simply unmatched for their capabilities at the time. Having all those tools on a simple and fast OS at the time felt like living in the future.

At the same time, BSD is severely lacking in gaming, graphics performance, compatibility with modern ecosystems, ease of use for less technical users, and generally seems to have stagnated in the last 10-15 or so years. Some chalk that up to leadership, some to the license / corporate interests largely moving to Linux, who knows. But these days I use Linux and while I miss the halcyon days of BSD, I wouldn’t switch back.

I guess it depends on scale.

• FSearch

• Recoll

• TypeSense

+1 for Gitlab. As the number of developers increases the features of Gitlab will get more and more important. Only OP can say, but if they’re closer to 9 developers than 2, I think it’s a safe bet they’ll need the extra features sooner rather than later.

Its dangerous to send goalposts flying around that fast, be careful or you’ll hurt yourself.

Your response is condescending, arguing from ignorance, and arguing in bad faith. I will reply this time, because once again you’re trying to build an argument on extremely shaky ground and I don’t enjoy people spreading ignorance unchallenged. However I won’t engage any further and feed whatever you think you’re getting from this.

I haven’t suggested that people should use Obsidian over OSS solutions. I was simply pointing out your argument against Obsidian’s architecture was poorly founded.

The data you’re insinuating will be lost is pure FUD. While the format isn’t standard markdown, none of the well implemented solutions are, because as you so rightly pointed out, markdown has little to no support for most of these features.

However, obsidian’s format is well documented and well understood. There are dozens of FOSS plugins and tools for converting or directly importing obsidian data to nearly every other solution. Due to obsidian’s popularity, it’s interoperability this way is often far superior to FOSS solutions’.

Content is your notes. In obsidian this is represented by markdown files in a flat filesystem. This format is already cross platform and doesn’t need to be exported.

Metadata is extracted information from your notes that makes processing the data more efficient. Tags, links, timestamp, keywords, titles, filenames, etc are metadata, stored in the metadata database. When you search for something in obsidian, or view the graph, or list files in a tag etc obsidian only opens the metadata database to process the request. It only opens the file for read/write.

Does this help?

Tell me, are you aware of the distinction between content and metadata?

Also, what do you mean, no official export? The data is already sitting on your filesystem in markdown…?

This isn’t really the case though. Obsidian uses a database for metadata, and therefore can extremely rapidly display, search, and find the correct file to open. It generally only opens a handful of files at a time.

I’ve used obsidian notes repos with hundreds of thousands of notes with no discernable performance impact. Something LogSeq certainly couldn’t do.

The complaint in the post you’ve linked is a) anecdotal and b) about the import process itself getting slow, which makes sense as obsidian is extracting the metadata.

I’ll always champion OSS software over proprietary, but claiming this is a huge failing of the obsidian design is just completely false. A metadata database fronting a flat filesystem architecture is very robust.

Edit: adding link to benchmark. https://www.goedel.io/p/interlude-obsidian-vs-100000

KobaldCPP or LocalAI will probably be the easiest way out of the box that has both image generation and LLMs.

I personally use vllm and HuggingChat, mostly because of vllm’s efficiency and speed increase.

Wow… That’s completely insane. Terrible approach for a software company. Thank you for explaining.

Honest question, since I’ve been seeing these sorts of anecdotes all over the Internet: why the fuck didn’t your IT group catch this with a simple patch management process?

https://github.com/Wingysam/Christmas-Community

https://github.com/generalpf/phpgiftreg/blob/master/src/README.md

https://github.com/wishthis/wishthis?tab=readme-ov-file

https://github.com/aunefyren/poenskelisten

Maybe one of these?

I can recommend Grandstream. They have a great UI, tons of features explained in plain English, and powerful Access Points for a fair price. Zero cloud features necessary. Also a US based company, if that matters to you.

But even cooler, the controller is built into the Access Point and is peer-to-peer if multiple APs are in use.

I switched a month ago from a full Unifi network and couldn’t be happier. Do note that they need PoE injectors to power the APs, but unlike Ubiquiti’s they don’t ship with them.