Zero ongoing costs:No database, no backend servers Deploy on Vercel/Netlify free tier in minutes Configurable via JSON (themes, text, multi-language)
Perfect for MVPs, landing pages, portfolios, or any low-volume use case.Repo: https://github.com/Luigigreco/gitforms License: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 (non-commercial only – fine for personal projects, not client work).Curious what HN thinks: would you use this? Any obvious improvements or edge cases I missed?Thanks!
- that the code is 100% mit licensed (it's not)
- that this is in any way gdpr compliant (there are literal rules around this)
- that your data is encrypted and private (it isn't encrypted? Unless being written in Italian is encryption now?)
- that they'll have 99.9% uptime (there is no SLA for vercel hobby tiers)
- "No middlemen. No third-party storage. Every submission lives in your GitHub..." (that is the very definition of third-party storage and a middleman)
If you know it's a glued-together solution that you'll have to rip apart if your program scales, why make it so complex in the first place?
You can utilize any mailing library in your backend to simply send emails or choose API email providers like Resend or Mailgun.
For spam protection, various providers are available, such as Cloudflare and Google.
> why make it so complex in the first place?
You're completely justified in questioning this, and I resonate with you and all the developers who feel the same way.
https://feature-refactor-for-cloudfl.first-contact.pages.dev...
It's no longer "live" so I wouldn't try and use it. I was using Supabase free tier to manage auth, and got tired of keeping it live. Good lesson learnt.
The Git trademark policy says they don't want people to name things like this.
> you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service
GitHub, GitLab, Gitorious (now gone)...
I agree in general, but I think this ship has sailed a ways out to sea already. I don't think essentially anyone thinks "GitThing" is "git's official Thing".
But it's a trademark, and trademark law in the USA is pretty constrained by "will an ordinary person likely be confused" and I can only come up with "probably not" counter-examples in enormous quantities (git-lfs? there are tons of git-prefixed things out there). Git™ is just used with git itself, in practice, and I've never seen anything else Git™-branded-and-prefixed by SFC that changes that.
I'm sure there's probably a court case or N that would make this a lot more clear, but it seems like a fairly safe established pattern in the industry, though it's best to respect SFC's request.
Yes. The trademark policy I linked to says, "Please be aware that GitHub and GitLab are exceptions to this Policy because they are subject to explicit licensing arrangements".
(But let's even suppose that it didn't say that and the answer to the question you're asking were "no". No trademark holder is required to submit their agreements for public review. So what does it matter that the ones with the trademark policy haven't sought you out to get your input (and blessing)? The general shape of these replies—including the willingness to spend effort arguing but none to eliminate the ignorance that you're stumbling into the discussion with—is grating.)
Good luck on that hill.
Meanwhile, OP's project goes brrr.
OP's project runs on a metered Git service. You're basically proving their point, as cool as the project is.
It seems like you want to make this into some kind of viable business, and I don't mean to dissuade by any means, but this was a three-day project by a perfectly good guy, but one guy, extremely junior, that I was tasked with training on basic networking and systems administration duties. I don't want to speak ill of the man. I liked him a lot, but he was extremely hard to teach, could not seem to understand even the bare basics of how computers and the systems they collectively form when networked operate. But he could make this exact application, on his own, in a matter of days, before LLMs were a thing.
Not saying you can't manage it, but this is like trying to sell people sandwiches. Plenty make businesses doing exactly that, but you either need a captive audience or really good sandwiches, because most of the time anyone who wants one can make it themselves pretty easily.
Glad to see someone executing on this, and I love how descriptive the landing page is.
I even have it connected to a google sheet and google scripts, to send me emails for entries matching some patterns.
Heavily depends on Google, yes, but for something free that honestly I won't care if stops working (like a prototype) I'm ok with it.
RadiozRadioz•1mo ago
Good that you've positioned it for prototypes.
captn3m0•1mo ago
RadiozRadioz•1mo ago