[hackerspaces] [Open Manufacturing] Re: Possible HackerSpace Hardware Inv. Software

[Sam Putman]

So when I click on "share", something should happen? other than this:

Root.default(virtual_path=('share',), keywords={})
cmd is:
virtual path is: ['share']

b/c I still have that MakerBeam YAML file somewhere, and there's more
documentation coming.

If I can't figure out how to use SKDB, or at least be convinced that
it's on its way to useful, I can't very well use SKDB to package the
MakerBeam project.

Perhaps some things have changed behind the scenes, and there may be
something I'm not seeing here. But it looks like the same old SKDB
that you had in august, which is to say, it doesn't do anything and
has no database to speak of.

What needs to happen to change that? I have a test project: several
objects, including a screw fer crikey's sake, which have various
materials, file formats for description, and dependencies. It needs to
be packaged up somehow; if I can't do SKDB I'm just going to accept an
inferior but gorrramit functional alternative like Thingiverse or an
awkward tarball.

I also volunteered to work on packaging the periodic table of
elements, and was told that this would be a waste of time. A
perspective I don't share, given that absolutely everything material
is built from said elements, but there you have it.

I'm willing to be the 'package maintainer' for MakerBeam and do the
work of getting the files straight, but I'm somewhat discouraged in
that: there appears to be no instructions at all as to how to do this,
it appears that no one including the two project heads has added new
packages in a long time, and the code base has evolved only minimally
and displays no function at present.

I'm worried that this project won't ever get past the puff-pieces and
presentations on YouTube stage, basically. SKDB or something like it
is an absolutely necessary part of the ecosystem, but the question
remains: when are we going to see SKDB 1.0? Or even a stable release
that does something?

-Sam.

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Sam Putman <atmanistan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Eureka wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>  I saw this the other day when just randomly poking around. It looks pretty
>>>> nice and can be self hosted.
>>>> Is anyone here already running it? If so how do you like it??
>>>>
>>>> http://www.opensourcerails.com/projects/51989-Hardware-Inventory
>>>
>>> Looks neat. Nick's suggestion to use thingiverse is spot-on. But if
>>> you want an open source version of thingiverse that you can host
>>> locally, maybe this can help:
>>>
>>> http://github.com/kanzure/skdb/
>>>
>>> In particular see the web/web.py file. There's no inventory system
>>> built in yet, but it's certainly planned.
>>
>> Do you think you could link to a functioning web install of SKDB,
>> something that demonstrates any degree of utility however minimal?
>>
>> A thingiverse killer should at least have a demo site, right?
>
> Ha, very well. Let me turn on a few servers.. try this?
>
> http://heybryan.org:8081/
>
> Of course, the main function is *not* a website (it's actually
> supposed to be like "apt-get").
>
> - Bryan
> http://heybryan.org/
> 1 512 203 0507
>