HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
tilework-tech
nori-skillsets
TypeScript2026–2026
tilework-tech / nori-skillsets

nori-skillsets

System for managing collections of agent skills. Switch between skillsets seamlessly!

2Distinct people
6Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
170GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

System for managing collections of agent skills. Switch between skillsets seamlessly!

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 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 7:24:48 PM 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 week6 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2026-04-09 16:05:49 UTC to 2026-09-07 14:34:05 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.

01232026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 commentsApr 62026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-06-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-06-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsJun 222026-06-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-06 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-06 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-13 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-13 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-17 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-17 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-24 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-24 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-08-31 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-08-31 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-09-07 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2026-09-07 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-09-14 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsSep 7

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Apr 62026-04-06 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC110
Apr 132026-04-13 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC303
Apr 202026-04-20 00:00:00 UTC2026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 272026-04-27 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC000
May 42026-05-04 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC000
May 112026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC000
May 182026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC000
May 252026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 12026-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC110
Jun 82026-06-08 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 152026-06-15 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 222026-06-22 00:00:00 UTC2026-06-29 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 292026-06-29 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-06 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 62026-07-06 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-13 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 132026-07-13 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 202026-07-20 00:00:00 UTC2026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 272026-07-27 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 32026-08-03 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 102026-08-10 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-17 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 172026-08-17 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-24 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 242026-08-24 00:00:00 UTC2026-08-31 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 312026-08-31 00:00:00 UTC2026-09-07 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 72026-09-07 00:00:00 UTC2026-09-14 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

3 sources
> My strong hunch is they are moving to closed source because it is now trivial to copy a product with AI clean rooms. Which, tbf, is a totally valid reason to move closed source. The "clean room" part of clean-room reverse engineering implies that there is no exposure to the original copyrighted code on the part of those doing the reimplementation, whether human developers or AI. Traditionally, if you're working of the source code itself, you have one party translate the source code back into a design document, specifying behavior, and then you have another party implement that design spec with original code. If you already have a running copy of the software to model the behavior off of, then you don't need the original source code in the first place. So going closed source will have zero effect on the capacity of AI tools to be used
Read the rest
for clean room reverse engineering: all you need is the runtime. > But I'd want to see more adoption of something like the Ship of Theseus license (https://github.com/tilework-tech/nori-skillsets/pull/465/cha...) before giving up on open source entirely This license doesn't seem valid: a license can't redefine what qualifies as a derivative work. That's determined by copyright law itself, and if copyright law says that a clean-room reimplementation isn't a derivative work, then it isn't restricted by copyright, so doesn't need a license in the first place.
In Cal.com is going closed source
I'm sorta suspicious. I don’t really think this is why they are moving to closed source. It’s true that there is more security risk, but that actually justifies being open source, because open source tooling can spend more tokens hardening itself against security vulns than closed source tooling (at least, that’s the theory). My strong hunch is they are moving to closed source because it is now trivial to copy a product with AI clean rooms. Which, tbf, is a totally valid reason to move closed source. But I'd want to see more adoption of something like the Ship of Theseus license (https://github.com/tilework-tech/nori-skillsets/pull/465/cha...) before giving up on open source entirely
In Cal.com is going closed source

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.