Nate Smith

years after the question of whether this is stale i will say yes, it is -- development effort moved to [vilmibm/hermeticum](https://github.com/vilmibm/hermeticum) but that has stalled out, too.

i love it! i'm imagining this is just an agreed-upon kv field? i wonder if we might want to support something like: ```hy (has {"meta" {"name" "vil" "description" "amorphous digital...

great idea! and yeah, definitely far off -- possibly even post beta, since the beta will clue us in to what a tutorial needs to teach

yeah, this was intentional but after seeing it in practice it's kind of silly...

i was planning on it! let's have this issue cover a `/destroy` command which can only affect carried objects that a user has a write permission for. (the former restriction...

i've been burned by terminal+mouse stuff; like weechat trying to do swiping and then preventing text highlighting. i'm not opposed to this as long as stuff like text selection still...

i've gone back and forth on this since the first round of design. i think for as long as possible i'd like to avoid a strict taxonomy like this and...

yes! i definitely have been thinking about reflection. you can grab an object's handlers pretty easily so a "responds_to" (yes, i know it's a rubyism) is trivial to implement.

I *think* we can take the first two off of this list. I know I proposed them, but I think we should just have both permissions and kv data editable...

I definitely see the merits in this for folks using GH at work under a single organization; I'm marking as `core` since I want us internally to discuss if a...