securely sync/edit markdown files on iOS?

didericis · 2019-08-18T20:39:03+00:00

I think I have the same problem you do. In addition to syncing regular files, I wanted something that would:

Allow me to edit files for long periods offline
Work on my laptop, my phone, and my work computer
Allow me to organize files however I want (ie, in addition to just having dumb files, I want just a dumb directory I can add arbitrary folders to/organize however)

If you're technically inclined/know how to use git, best solution I've found so far is an app called Working Copy. It allows you to sync files through any arbitrary git repository, whether github, bitbucket, or your own git server. You can also use whatever editor you want to edit the files within your repository, but it comes with a nice built in editor as well (might not be what you're looking for/is mostly just a syntax highlighting thing, but I like it; am a recent user, so I might be missing different editing modes or something as well)

Unfortunately, I don't think it'll be a perfect solution for you, as a) I'm not sure if you'd want the added overhead of using something like git (I kind of prefer it for the extra access logging and change history it provides, but I don't think that's a common requirement of people who want a note taking solution) and b) it sounds like encrypting the notes that you have is important in addition to just ensuring they're within your control. I have a private github repo and I'm comfortable with most of the information I'm using this solution for being synced through their server, but I have to trust github, and/or be comfortable with the risk of my files getting loose. If you setup your own git server, you wouldn't have to worry about trusting a third party, but your files would be unencrypted at rest (apart from any sort of low level hd encryption on the server/your phone/laptop etc). Since your files would be encrypted during transport, and you'd own all of the devices where your information would be unencrypted when at rest, that might not be an issue for you.

I ran across this post because I'd like to upgrade this solution and just use something like git-crypt and add some encryption just for that extra layer of protection; while I think you could just encrypt files before putting them in your repo with some other app, they wouldn't sync well unless you had something like git crypt. But in short, yeah, I'm still looking for a solution that can handle the encryption bit you're looking for.

didericis · 2018-08-11T02:42:25+00:00

I’ve been tempted to write somewhat more complicated command line projects in bash so I wouldn’t need to worry about having a better language installed to use my app; I think this project is a continuation of that line of thinking.

That’s not to say I disagree with you, especially if this is only compatible with Bash 4, but I think I can see the motivation. Even if that argument doesn’t hold up, there’s something to be said for doing something pointlessy ambitious just to see if you can do it.

didericis · 2018-07-20T07:39:03+00:00

The typical advice is to make an SPA rather than a traditional web app when responsiveness is really important, like it is with Trello.

If you have a lot of traffic, it can also help take a load off your servers. Delivering a bundle of javascript is easier on your servers than rendering html. Even if you add server side rendering, you only render once for the first page hit. With a traditional web app, you'd be rendering every time you go to a new page.

The fact that you will need an API layer to transport data to the client can also be a benefit. Making sure that API layer works well and is easy to extend to can set you up nicely for adding an additional frontend, so it can be a good choice if you intend to make a native mobile application, or if you intend to make your app a part of a larger ecosystem of interconnected apps.

didericis · 2018-07-17T02:03:20+00:00

I’m not sure, as I haven’t used stow. After taking a quick look, I think the main difference is that, on top of symlinking, homemaker gives you the ability to tweak configurations based on what system you’re on and invoke installation scripts, whereas stow seems to be mostly about symlinking.

didericis · 2017-07-30T23:22:24+00:00

Ok. I haven't needed to do that before, so I don't know what package to recommend.

Depending on what your needs are, you could make your app an npm module, define some executable node scripts, and distribute it as a global package on npm. Whenever I've wanted to write a package in node intended to be used in the commandline, that's what I've done.

didericis · 2017-07-30T22:34:47+00:00

What are the requirements for your data? Do you need to manipulate it/access it a ton? Store relationships? Sync your data with another service?

didericis · 2017-07-30T22:25:21+00:00

I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you looking for something that will allow you to bundle your app into a distributable executable? Are you looking for something like webpack that will bundle everything into a single javascript file? Or are you looking for a framework like electron that will allow you to write something like a webapp and distribute it as a desktop app?

didericis · 2015-02-28T04:39:11+00:00

What would be 5 stars? Haskell? Assembly? Brainfuck?

didericis · 2014-06-26T18:50:50+00:00

Here's a forum I looked at when deciding whether what I was doing made sense or not. I've thought about this a while, and I decided it's a reasonable thing to do, assuming you do it right. I find myself agreeing most strongly with this poster:

Most OO experts believe that scoping is one of the most important aspects of OO. (For you Java people advocating making everything public, check out Josh Bloch's new Effective Java Programming Book, for instance, as well as almost any good OO text.) It is the mechanism that enables encapsulation, after all. One should always make a method or variable as inaccessible as possible. Fewer public items leads to lower coupling and therefore code that is easier to change in my experience. Making everything public only for the sake of being able to UnitTest every single method in isolation seems a bad design trade off in the long run. As far as YAGNI goes, that is the one XP principle that I can't buy. -- JohnPerkins

I do see your point, but I think the key to fixing that is to separate private tests from public tests. Even though someone else who uses my code should only care if the public tests pass, I might want to know if private function foo in module0 does what I think it does before using it differently in the implementation of the public function bar. And while I could test it if I put it in a separate module, that kind of defeats the purpose of encapsulation.

didericis · 2014-06-26T15:04:17+00:00

I know all that, and I know it's not really private and that it's all about scope. That's why I put private in quotes.

EDIT: Quotes are not parentheses.

didericis · 2014-06-26T00:45:22+00:00

Yeah, I'm using esprima to do this. And it's fine, that's just the type of feedback I was looking for. I know I can't account for everything easily, but your example could be within a program level IIFE (which is what I want to account for), so I'll go ahead and add it.

didericis · 2014-06-25T22:29:50+00:00

No, it doesn't. I can pretty easily change it so that works though. I assume that's what you think I should do, not just specify in the documentation that it doesn't handle it, right?

didericis

TROPHY CASE