User:Kim/Project Proposal (Gitpub) - Revision history

Kim: /* References */

2025-11-21T08:52:36Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:52, 21 November 2025
Line 142:		Line 142:
	Hoff, M. (2020). Always Already Programming. ''Github Gist''. Available at: https://gist.github.com/melaniehoff/95ca90df7ca47761dc3d3d58fead22d4 [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].		Hoff, M. (2020). Always Already Programming. ''Github Gist''. Available at: https://gist.github.com/melaniehoff/95ca90df7ca47761dc3d3d58fead22d4 [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].

	Monjour, S. and Sauret, N. (2021). Pour une gittérature. ''HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)'', 2021, pp.237–252. doi:https://doi.org/10.48611/isbn.978-2-406-12363-7.p.0237.		Monjour, S. and Sauret, N. (2021). ''Pour une gittérature''. HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), 2021, pp.237–252. doi:https://doi.org/10.48611/isbn.978-2-406-12363-7.p.0237.

	Murthaugh, M. (2019). Eventual Consistency. ''DiVersions''. Available at: https://diversions.constantvzw.org/wiki/index.php?title=Eventual_Consistency [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].		Murthaugh, M. (2019). Eventual Consistency. ''DiVersions''. Available at: https://diversions.constantvzw.org/wiki/index.php?title=Eventual_Consistency [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].

Kim: /* References */

2025-11-19T10:16:23Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:16, 19 November 2025
Line 149:		Line 149:

	Star, S. L. (1994). ''Misplaced Concretism and Concrete Situations: Feminism, Method, and Information Technology''. In: Bowker, G. et al. (eds) Boundary objects and beyond: working with Leigh Star. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 143 – 170		Star, S. L. (1994). ''Misplaced Concretism and Concrete Situations: Feminism, Method, and Information Technology''. In: Bowker, G. et al. (eds) Boundary objects and beyond: working with Leigh Star. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 143 – 170
	<br>		<br><br>
	<references />		<references />

Kim: /* References */

2025-11-19T10:16:14Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:16, 19 November 2025
Line 149:		Line 149:

	Star, S. L. (1994). ''Misplaced Concretism and Concrete Situations: Feminism, Method, and Information Technology''. In: Bowker, G. et al. (eds) Boundary objects and beyond: working with Leigh Star. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 143 – 170		Star, S. L. (1994). ''Misplaced Concretism and Concrete Situations: Feminism, Method, and Information Technology''. In: Bowker, G. et al. (eds) Boundary objects and beyond: working with Leigh Star. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 143 – 170
			<br>
	<references />		<references />

Kim: /* How do you plan to make it? */

2025-11-19T10:14:53Z

How do you plan to make it?

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:14, 19 November 2025
Line 20:		Line 20:
	== How do you plan to make it? ==		== How do you plan to make it? ==
	[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/GitPub\| Prototype documentation]]<br>		[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/GitPub\| Prototype documentation]]<br>
	[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/Writing Scripts (Workshop)\|collaborative writing exercises (workshop page)]]		[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/Writing Scripts (Workshop)\|collaborative writing exercises (workshop page)]]<br>
	Printed prototypes:		Printed prototypes:
	<gallery>		<gallery>

Kim: /* How do you plan to make it? */

2025-11-19T10:14:44Z

How do you plan to make it?

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:14, 19 November 2025
Line 20:		Line 20:
	== How do you plan to make it? ==		== How do you plan to make it? ==
	[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/GitPub\| Prototype documentation]]<br>		[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/GitPub\| Prototype documentation]]<br>
			[[User:Kim/Prototyping 2nd year/Writing Scripts (Workshop)\|collaborative writing exercises (workshop page)]]
	Printed prototypes:		Printed prototypes:
	<gallery>		<gallery>

Kim: /* References */

2025-11-19T08:49:58Z

References

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:49, 19 November 2025
Line 135:		Line 135:

	== References ==		== References ==
			Boulding, K.E (1969). ''Technology and the changing social order''. in Popenoe, D. (ed) ''The Urban-Industrial Frontier''. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, pp. 126 – 140

			Franklin, U.M. and CBC Enterprises (1990). ''The Real World of Technology''. Montréal ; Toronto : CBC Enterprises.

			Hoff, M. (2020). Always Already Programming. ''Github Gist''. Available at: https://gist.github.com/melaniehoff/95ca90df7ca47761dc3d3d58fead22d4 [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].

			Monjour, S. and Sauret, N. (2021). Pour une gittérature. ''HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)'', 2021, pp.237–252. doi:https://doi.org/10.48611/isbn.978-2-406-12363-7.p.0237.

			Murthaugh, M. (2019). Eventual Consistency. ''DiVersions''. Available at: https://diversions.constantvzw.org/wiki/index.php?title=Eventual_Consistency [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].

			pzwiki.wdka.nl. (2024). ''Prototyping 2024/2025 intro - XPUB & Lens-Based wiki''. [online] Available at: https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mediadesign/Prototyping_2024/2025_intro [Accessed 13 Nov. 2025].

			Star, S. L. (1994). ''Misplaced Concretism and Concrete Situations: Feminism, Method, and Information Technology''. In: Bowker, G. et al. (eds) Boundary objects and beyond: working with Leigh Star. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 143 – 170

	<references />		<references />

Kim: /* Why do you want to make it? */

2025-11-19T08:48:39Z

Why do you want to make it?

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:48, 19 November 2025
Line 98:		Line 98:

	== Why do you want to make it? ==		== Why do you want to make it? ==
	gitpub explores how we write and are written by software through the example of collaborative version control software as publishing tool. When using software for text editing or collaboration (e.g. .git, etherpad, word, google docs, code editors) we assume to be in control of the text emerging in front of us. But additional to the text we consciously form, there is a lot more text produced, yet not directly by us. This additional text is often metadata, used to index and render machine readable what we typed. Text is therefore always created reciprocally, rather than one-way. With gitpub I want to expose how software writes us back, in other words, how the different modes and actors in the writing process influence each other.		gitpub explores how we write and are written by software through the example of collaborative version control software as publishing tool. When using software for text editing or collaboration (e.g. .git, etherpad, word, google docs, code editors) we assume to be in control of the text emerging in front of us. But additional to the text we consciously form, there is a lot more text produced, yet not directly by us. This additional text is often metadata, used to index and render machine readable what we typed. Text is therefore always created reciprocally, rather than one-way. With gitpub I want to expose how software writes us back, in other words, how the different modes and actors in the writing process influence each other.

	The above paradigm emphasises the software as part of the writing. In the following i will elaborate on the software as a part of community.		The above paradigm emphasises the software as part of the writing. In the following i will elaborate on the software as a part of community.
Line 104:		Line 104:
	Gitpub is a tool in the sense of a “boundary object (Star, 1994) that connects different communities of practice (Star, 1994)” (pzwiki.wdka.nl, 2024).		Gitpub is a tool in the sense of a “boundary object (Star, 1994) that connects different communities of practice (Star, 1994)” (pzwiki.wdka.nl, 2024).

	The use of tools like git is highly cultural: different communities follow different protocols of use. Yet working with git in day to day operations, the familiarity of its gestures and rhythms conceals the softwares own ways of writing and its cultural ~~situatednessThis~~ goes along with Susan Leigh Star’s concept of naturalization: in which “de-situated” or “naturalized” objects become invisible to members of community of practice through omnipresence and use. A consequence of this process is a communities decreasing criticality towards the object (Star, 1994).. By deliberately extending and mis-using this existing piece of software I want to challenge its embeddedness into (white, male, optimisation driven) developing cultures and an industry that profits from maintaining compartmentalised, hidden labor and the divide between user and programmer (Hoff, 2020).		The use of tools like git is highly cultural: different communities follow different protocols of use. Yet working with git in day to day operations, the familiarity of its gestures and rhythms conceals the softwares own ways of writing and its cultural situatedness<ref>This goes along with Susan Leigh Star’s concept of naturalization: in which “de-situated” or “naturalized” objects become invisible to members of community of practice through omnipresence and use. A consequence of this process is a communities decreasing criticality towards the object (Star, 1994).</ref>. By deliberately extending and mis-using this existing piece of software I want to challenge its embeddedness into (white, male, optimisation driven) developing cultures and an industry that profits from maintaining compartmentalised, hidden labor and the divide between user and programmer (Hoff, 2020).

	Ursula Franklin’s writing introduced me to Kenneth Bouldings understanding of “technology as practice, as way of doing something” (Boulding, 1969). This notion links the definition of technology to culture, which we could define as “a set of socially accepted practices and values” (Franklin and CBC Enterprises, 1990). Making a tool, while also building it upon existing software, I aim to gain an understanding of technology through the culture and communities it is situated in.		Ursula Franklin’s writing introduced me to Kenneth Bouldings understanding of “technology as practice, as way of doing something” (Boulding, 1969). This notion links the definition of technology to culture, which we could define as “a set of socially accepted practices and values” (Franklin and CBC Enterprises, 1990). Making a tool, while also building it upon existing software, I aim to gain an understanding of technology through the culture and communities it is situated in.

Kim: /* Relation to a larger context */

2025-11-19T08:47:36Z

Relation to a larger context

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:47, 19 November 2025
Line 130:		Line 130:
	== Relation to a larger context ==		== Relation to a larger context ==

	I understand Gitpub as situated in a lively ecology of experimental publishing tools, practices and concepts. There are for instance [https://osp.kitchen/ Open Source Publishing] and [https://prepostprint.org/ Pre Post Print] who practice graphic design and publishing with free software, rooted in collectivity and hacking based approaches. I here want name a few of the many existing publishing tools that, like gitpub, leverage free software. Octomode[https://cc.vvvvvvaria.org/wiki/Octomode Octomode] was developed by Mantetta Berends and Christina Cochior together with Varia. and Chattypub[https://www.hackersanddesigners.nl/chattypub.html Chattypub] was developed by Hackers and Designers, for example, are built for acts of low threshold collaborative publishing, while ikiwiki[https://ikiwiki.info/ ikiwiki] was developed by Joey Hess is more focused on converting wiki to html files using version control. Aesthetic ~~programminghere~~ is a link to the [https://aesthetic-programming.net/ web version], and the [https://gitlab.com/aesthetic-programming/book git repository], developed by Open Source Publishing is a hybrid publication based on a git repository. Gitpub diﬀers from the last two examples because it involves the version control metadata, not only within the writing process, but also as part of the outcome.		I understand Gitpub as situated in a lively ecology of experimental publishing tools, practices and concepts. There are for instance [https://osp.kitchen/ Open Source Publishing] and [https://prepostprint.org/ Pre Post Print] who practice graphic design and publishing with free software, rooted in collectivity and hacking based approaches. I here want name a few of the many existing publishing tools that, like gitpub, leverage free software. Octomode<ref>[https://cc.vvvvvvaria.org/wiki/Octomode Octomode] was developed by Mantetta Berends and Christina Cochior together with Varia.</ref> and Chattypub<ref>[https://www.hackersanddesigners.nl/chattypub.html Chattypub] was developed by Hackers and Designers</ref>, for example, are built for acts of low threshold collaborative publishing, while ikiwiki<ref>[https://ikiwiki.info/ ikiwiki] was developed by Joey Hess</ref> is more focused on converting wiki to html files using version control. Aesthetic programming<ref>here is a link to the [https://aesthetic-programming.net/ web version], and the [https://gitlab.com/aesthetic-programming/book git repository], developed by Open Source Publishing</ref> is a hybrid publication based on a git repository. Gitpub diﬀers from the last two examples because it involves the version control metadata, not only within the writing process, but also as part of the outcome.

	Lastly I want to mention a few theoretical approaches, that I relate gitpub to on a more conceptual basis. In ‘Eventual Consistency’ Michael Murtaugh analyses the history of algorithms in collaborative text editing software against the backdrop of variation which he sees as central element to collaborative work. He criticises the stripping of context and variation as common engineering mistake (Murthaugh, 2019). Through this text I gained insights into the processes and boundaries of engineering human communication and collaboration in real time. Servanne Monjour and Nicolas Sauret, as part of the Aprübt publishing collective, propose gitterature as an alternative model for literature and editorial processes (Monjour and Sauret, 2021). While I share their understanding of the git writing environment as inherently processual, performative and conversational, my approach is to create a tool that is less platform based and meant to be reusable across multiple communities. Gitpub, as many of the above mentioned tools, is loosely connected to the UNIX design ~~philosophysee~~ also: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy wikipedia], and discussed in context: [https://freeze.sh/_/2008/awkward/# Awkward Gestures] by Femke Snelting which favours small, specific tools, that are built to perform simple tasks while leaving enough space for users to build their own configurations or connect multiple tools to another.		Lastly I want to mention a few theoretical approaches, that I relate gitpub to on a more conceptual basis. In ‘Eventual Consistency’ Michael Murtaugh analyses the history of algorithms in collaborative text editing software against the backdrop of variation which he sees as central element to collaborative work. He criticises the stripping of context and variation as common engineering mistake (Murthaugh, 2019). Through this text I gained insights into the processes and boundaries of engineering human communication and collaboration in real time. Servanne Monjour and Nicolas Sauret, as part of the Aprübt publishing collective, propose gitterature as an alternative model for literature and editorial processes (Monjour and Sauret, 2021). While I share their understanding of the git writing environment as inherently processual, performative and conversational, my approach is to create a tool that is less platform based and meant to be reusable across multiple communities. Gitpub, as many of the above mentioned tools, is loosely connected to the UNIX design philosophy<ref>see also: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy wikipedia], and discussed in context: [https://freeze.sh/_/2008/awkward/# Awkward Gestures] by Femke Snelting</ref> which favours small, specific tools, that are built to perform simple tasks while leaving enough space for users to build their own configurations or connect multiple tools to another.

	== References ==		== References ==

	<references />		<references />

Kim: /* Relation to a larger context */

2025-11-19T08:46:40Z

Relation to a larger context

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:46, 19 November 2025
Line 130:		Line 130:
	== Relation to a larger context ==		== Relation to a larger context ==

	I understand Gitpub as situated in a lively ecology of experimental publishing tools, practices and concepts.		I understand Gitpub as situated in a lively ecology of experimental publishing tools, practices and concepts. There are for instance [https://osp.kitchen/ Open Source Publishing] and [https://prepostprint.org/ Pre Post Print] who practice graphic design and publishing with free software, rooted in collectivity and hacking based approaches. I here want name a few of the many existing publishing tools that, like gitpub, leverage free software. Octomode[https://cc.vvvvvvaria.org/wiki/Octomode Octomode] was developed by Mantetta Berends and Christina Cochior together with Varia. and Chattypub[https://www.hackersanddesigners.nl/chattypub.html Chattypub] was developed by Hackers and Designers, for example, are built for acts of low threshold collaborative publishing, while ikiwiki[https://ikiwiki.info/ ikiwiki] was developed by Joey Hess is more focused on converting wiki to html files using version control. Aesthetic programminghere is a link to the [https://aesthetic-programming.net/ web version], and the [https://gitlab.com/aesthetic-programming/book git repository], developed by Open Source Publishing is a hybrid publication based on a git repository. Gitpub diﬀers from the last two examples because it involves the version control metadata, not only within the writing process, but also as part of the outcome.

	~~There are~~ for ~~instance~~ [https://~~osp~~.~~kitchen~~/ ~~Open Source Publishing~~] ~~and Pre post print who practice graphic design and publishing with free software~~, ~~rooted collectivity~~ and ~~hacking based approaches~~. ~~I here want name a few of the many existing publishing~~ tools that~~, like gitpub, leverage free software~~.		Lastly I want to mention a few theoretical approaches, that I relate gitpub to on a more conceptual basis. In ‘Eventual Consistency’ Michael Murtaugh analyses the history of algorithms in collaborative text editing software against the backdrop of variation which he sees as central element to collaborative work. He criticises the stripping of context and variation as common engineering mistake (Murthaugh, 2019). Through this text I gained insights into the processes and boundaries of engineering human communication and collaboration in real time. Servanne Monjour and Nicolas Sauret, as part of the Aprübt publishing collective, propose gitterature as an alternative model for literature and editorial processes (Monjour and Sauret, 2021). While I share their understanding of the git writing environment as inherently processual, performative and conversational, my approach is to create a tool that is less platform based and meant to be reusable across multiple communities. Gitpub, as many of the above mentioned tools, is loosely connected to the UNIX design philosophysee also: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy wikipedia], and discussed in context: [https://freeze.sh/_/2008/awkward/# Awkward Gestures] by Femke Snelting which favours small, specific tools, that are built to perform simple tasks while leaving enough space for users to build their own configurations or connect multiple tools to another.

	Octomode<ref>Octomode was developed by Mantetta Berends and Christina Cochior together with Varia.</ref> and Chattypub<ref>Chattypub was developed by Hackers and Designers https://www.hackersanddesigners.nl/chattypub.html</ref>, for example, are built for acts of low threshold collaborative publishing, while ikiwiki<ref>https://ikiwiki.info/</ref> is more focused on converting wiki to html files using version control. Aesthetic programming<ref>find the web version here: https://aesthetic-programming.net/, and the git repository: https://gitlab.com/aesthetic-programming/book, developed by Open Source Publishing</ref> is a hybrid publication based on a git repository. Gitpub differs from the last two mentioned examples in my approach of involving the version control, its metadata, the software in use, as of not only the process but the outcome.

	Lastly I want to mention a few theoretical approaches, that I relate gitpub to on a more conceptual basis. In [https://diversions.constantvzw.org/wiki/index.php?title=Eventual_Consistency Eventual Consistency] Michael Murtaugh analyses the history of algorithms in collaborative text editing software against the backdrop of variation. He herein understands the latter as central element to collaborative work and criticises the stripping of context and variation as common engineering mistake.

	Servanne Monjour and Nicolas Sauret, as part of the Aprübt publishing collective, propose gitterature as an alternative model for literature and editorial processes. They understand the git writing environment as inherently processual, performative and conversational.<ref>Servanne Monjour, Nicolas Sauret. Pour une gittérature. XXI/XX Reconnaissances littéraires, 2021, 2, pp. 237-252. 10.48611/isbn.978-2-406-12363-7.p.0237. hal-03962836 https://hal.parisnanterre.fr/hal-03962836/document</ref>

	Gitpub, as many of the above mentioned tools, is loosely connected to the UNIX design philosophy<ref>see also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy, in context: ‘Awkward Gestures’ by Femke Snelting via https://freeze.sh/_/2008/awkward/#</ref> which favours small, specific tools, that are built to perform simple tasks while leaving enough space for users to build their own configurations or connect multiple tools to another.

	~~<span id="references"></span>~~
	== References ==		== References ==

	<references />		<references />

Kim: /* Why do you want to make it? */

2025-11-19T08:45:50Z

Why do you want to make it?

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:45, 19 November 2025
Line 98:		Line 98:

	== Why do you want to make it? ==		== Why do you want to make it? ==
			gitpub explores how we write and are written by software through the example of collaborative version control software as publishing tool. When using software for text editing or collaboration (e.g. .git, etherpad, word, google docs, code editors) we assume to be in control of the text emerging in front of us. But additional to the text we consciously form, there is a lot more text produced, yet not directly by us. This additional text is often metadata, used to index and render machine readable what we typed. Text is therefore always created reciprocally, rather than one-way. With gitpub I want to expose how software writes us back, in other words, how the different modes and actors in the writing process influence each other.

	94)” (pzwiki.wdka.nl, 2024).		The above paradigm emphasises the software as part of the writing. In the following i will elaborate on the software as a part of community.

			Gitpub is a tool in the sense of a “boundary object (Star, 1994) that connects different communities of practice (Star, 1994)” (pzwiki.wdka.nl, 2024).

	The use of tools like git is highly cultural: different communities follow different protocols of use. Yet working with git in day to day operations, the familiarity of its gestures and rhythms conceals the softwares own ways of writing and its cultural situatednessThis goes along with Susan Leigh Star’s concept of naturalization: in which “de-situated” or “naturalized” objects become invisible to members of community of practice through omnipresence and use. A consequence of this process is a communities decreasing criticality towards the object (Star, 1994).. By deliberately extending and mis-using this existing piece of software I want to challenge its embeddedness into (white, male, optimisation driven) developing cultures and an industry that profits from maintaining compartmentalised, hidden labor and the divide between user and programmer (Hoff, 2020).		The use of tools like git is highly cultural: different communities follow different protocols of use. Yet working with git in day to day operations, the familiarity of its gestures and rhythms conceals the softwares own ways of writing and its cultural situatednessThis goes along with Susan Leigh Star’s concept of naturalization: in which “de-situated” or “naturalized” objects become invisible to members of community of practice through omnipresence and use. A consequence of this process is a communities decreasing criticality towards the object (Star, 1994).. By deliberately extending and mis-using this existing piece of software I want to challenge its embeddedness into (white, male, optimisation driven) developing cultures and an industry that profits from maintaining compartmentalised, hidden labor and the divide between user and programmer (Hoff, 2020).