VIviraptor·Mar 24, 2017
Another extreme electron example: https://github.com/manosim/gitify/releases
48.8MB when packed. All it provides is a status bar notification window.
In Going nativegitify-app
gitify
TypeScript2016–2017
gitify-app / gitify
gitify
Git notifications on your menu bar. Available on macOS, Windows & Linux.
2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
5.4KGitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
Git notifications on your menu bar. Available on macOS, Windows & Linux.
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 11:56:56 AM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by week2 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2016-11-20 10:43:34 UTC to 2017-03-24 02:43:08 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 14 | 2016-11-14 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-11-21 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Nov 21 | 2016-11-21 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-11-28 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nov 28 | 2016-11-28 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-12-05 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 5 | 2016-12-05 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-12-12 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 12 | 2016-12-12 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-12-19 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 19 | 2016-12-19 00:00:00 UTC | 2016-12-26 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec 26 | 2016-12-26 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-02 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 2 | 2017-01-02 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-09 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 9 | 2017-01-09 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-16 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 16 | 2017-01-16 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-23 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 23 | 2017-01-23 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-01-30 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jan 30 | 2017-01-30 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-02-06 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 6 | 2017-02-06 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-02-13 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 13 | 2017-02-13 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-02-20 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 20 | 2017-02-20 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-02-27 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Feb 27 | 2017-02-27 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-03-06 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 6 | 2017-03-06 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-03-13 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 13 | 2017-03-13 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-03-20 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 20 | 2017-03-20 00:00:00 UTC | 2017-03-27 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
2 sourcesAsk HN: Is it possible to secure an open source app that uses 3rd party oauth?
Isn't the whole point of CLIENT_SECRETS to keep them secret? I understand that once your code is run clientside there is no point in trying to obfuscate anything. However, isn't there a risk in your application being compromised by someone using your credentials or am I missing something here because it seems to be the norm, the google api samples all have hardcoded bits that you plug your tokens and keys into. There is always the option of having a middleman to intercept calls from the client, authenticate and send back the access token but this doesn't seem to deter most people I've seen that just hardcode these anyway. ie: https://github.com/manosim/gitify/blob/master/src/js/utils/constants.js#L3:L4
1 points · Open discussion