I agree that it could be nice for rapid development in an ecosystem around a central service - iirc that's what FB developed it for - but it's indeed overkill for something simple that doesn't change much (and if it does, you need versioning) and you just want to install and run; especially if it's distributed by nature.

It's also funny that the caching is killing my experience with this particular web-ui because I need to literally hit refresh when navigating (using in-app navigation) to see new state on an issue - so in this instance it's also kind of awfully implemented.

I was thinking that git-bug could be nice for git-collab-over-decentralized-protocol (like the nostr thing) because it can ultimately reduce the code needed, and technically I shouldn't need to run it as a server other than for some management GUI. But to support github-like code collaboration, review and communication, issues need to evolve to pull requests, so I am looking to hack that in.

Also, it may be nice to have everything in a single repo when running transient containers for LLM coding workloads. I figured a while back that if we're going to let an LLM code like a pro, we should treat it like a pro: not some prompt and a log and that's it, but really integrate a fully tooled agile workflow into the process. No need a gui with an annoying chatbox then, and doing it via text files doesn't scale with all the bloat LLMs generate - something structured would be nice. Anyway I was thinking that if this works well, I could in theory automate a whole dev team fr.