HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
trustly
bankapi
HISTORICAL RECORD2014–2015
trustly / bankapi · Not publicly available

bankapi

Discover this repository through its Hacker News conversations.

Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
2Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A public description has not been verified.

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, 1:49:46 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 week5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2014-09-04 09:07:11 UTC to 2015-02-25 07:32:40 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.

012342014-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-09-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 1 submissions, 3 commentsSep 12014-09-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-09-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-09-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-09-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-09-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-09-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-09-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-10-06 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-10-06 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-10-13 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-10-13 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-10-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-10-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-10-27 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-10-27 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-11-03 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-11-03 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-11-10 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-11-10 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-11-17 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-11-17 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-11-24 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-11-24 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsNov 242014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-12-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-12-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-12-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-12-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-12-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-12-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-12-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2014-12-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-05 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-12 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-12 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-19 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-26 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-02-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-02-02 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-02-09 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-02-09 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-02-16 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-02-16 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-02-23 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2015-02-23 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-03-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsFeb 23

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
Sep 12014-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-09-08 00:00:00 UTC413
Sep 82014-09-08 00:00:00 UTC2014-09-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 152014-09-15 00:00:00 UTC2014-09-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 222014-09-22 00:00:00 UTC2014-09-29 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 292014-09-29 00:00:00 UTC2014-10-06 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 62014-10-06 00:00:00 UTC2014-10-13 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 132014-10-13 00:00:00 UTC2014-10-20 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 202014-10-20 00:00:00 UTC2014-10-27 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 272014-10-27 00:00:00 UTC2014-11-03 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 32014-11-03 00:00:00 UTC2014-11-10 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 102014-11-10 00:00:00 UTC2014-11-17 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 172014-11-17 00:00:00 UTC2014-11-24 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 242014-11-24 00:00:00 UTC2014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 12014-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-12-08 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 82014-12-08 00:00:00 UTC2014-12-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 152014-12-15 00:00:00 UTC2014-12-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 222014-12-22 00:00:00 UTC2014-12-29 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 292014-12-29 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-05 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 52015-01-05 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-12 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 122015-01-12 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-19 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 192015-01-19 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-26 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 262015-01-26 00:00:00 UTC2015-02-02 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 22015-02-02 00:00:00 UTC2015-02-09 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 92015-02-09 00:00:00 UTC2015-02-16 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 162015-02-16 00:00:00 UTC2015-02-23 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 232015-02-23 00:00:00 UTC2015-03-02 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
JoelJacobson·Feb 25, 2015
I think it's mainly GnuPG's fault. There is no API, so developers can't integrate it into their applications. The only way is to pass arguments to gpg binary and interpret the output on STDOUT using regexes. The "libraries" that exist for Python and other languages all work like this. That is why they require you to specify the "The path to the gpg executable." If GnuPG provided a real API, then there would be hope, because the actual OpenPGP specification isn't that bad if you only implement and use the bare-minimum features. This is one of the reasons my company developed support to deal with PGP signatures directly in PostgreSQL, without using GnuPG: https://github.com/trustly/bankapi/tree/master/debian/postgr... It's a bit funny it's now actually safer/better/easier to use PostgreSQL instead of GnuPG if you are developing an applicati
Read the rest
on which uses PGP, as your only option is to pass input to the gpg executable and regex it's output, which is hackish and not suitable for production purposes.
In GPG and Me

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.