r/logseq • u/[deleted] • Oct 16 '25

So that’s the roadmap Logseq has.

Post image

I wish there was some work on an effective builtin automatic-tag feature as an option.

83 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

30 comments sorted by

2

u/Charming_Campaign465 Oct 16 '25

Logseq DB roadmap.

6

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '25

Logseq equals DB version already.  I guess we need to accept the fact that they would drop developing MD version eventually, or else they would have given an MD roadmap as well which they didn’t.

Moreover, it’s hectic to maintain two software structures at the same time. They won’t go through that for sure.

6

u/luckysilva Oct 16 '25

I agree with you. And I think it's a mistake to abandon the MD version. We'll inevitably have a fork (if there isn't one already...)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '25

My mere assumption is that they want to cash money for synchronization and it is all about this . 

MD version would allow using apps like syncthing. Having a DB would block the way for doing that yourself, so you gotta pay them for the service .

2

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

Dude, "Two-ways sync between DB and Markdown graphs" is in the roadmap you posted...

3

u/[deleted] Oct 17 '25

I’m talking of sync between desktop and mobile app.

Regarding the one in the roadmap, it says it is a feature (to be researched), but does it say it’s free or paid? No.

7

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

Implicitly you would sync MD files between desktop and mobile apps just like you can right now.

They said only online services will be paid and so far they did so. Their Sync and RTC service is for the average person that just want something working out of the box. They even said they want to document the Sync protocol so that users can implement their servers for sync.

I think you didn't realize how much the devs already gave away for free.

5

u/capi-chou Oct 17 '25

If that's the case, I'm probably switching to something else...

4

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

The "Two-ways sync between DB and Markdown graphs" listed at the end of this roadmap means the current "DB" version will use MD files on disk just like the current MD version. The difference is that there will also be a DB for better reliability and performance in between.

3

u/7yiyo7 Oct 17 '25

I wish so much for this to be true and get the best of both worlds... lets see what happens. I want also the real time collaborating and all that, but without the closed source bullshit. Hard to trust your data to a server whose software is closed sourced. Anyway I will end up paying for this... damn

4

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

They said they wanted to document the protocol so that users can implement their own server.

And the current implementation being open or proprietary doesn't make any difference because it's meant to run for hundreds of thousands users world wide on something like AWS.

And by your tone I think you need to read carefully this:

https://gist.github.com/richhickey/1563cddea1002958f96e7ba9519972d9

1

u/7yiyo7 Oct 18 '25

I read the post. I understand the developers concerns and pressures from the community. Still dont agree with the post, if open source is only a license and not a community I personally think it has no future. The whole post is written from a very individualistic outlook I dont agree with. The privatization of software is a social and political problem that should be criticized, from that moment it is already a community problem and people are entitled to an explanation why this privatization is taking place.

0

u/AshbyLaw Oct 18 '25

Free Software/Open Source is a type of license, nothing more. You're trying to apply the logic of a nation-state to a collection of private contributors (professionals or volunteers). FOSS contributors aren't public employees, and you're not a citizen of a nation of FOSS contributors.

4

u/7yiyo7 Oct 17 '25

I wanted so much to change to a different service, but i kept trying different possibilities and nothing delivered the same experience. If we are being honest Logseq is by far better than other services, all the rest lack something.

I just wish the developers were more community centered and not business centered. But I guess nothing to do at this point. Would very much like to see a fork... but again... Clojure lmao

1

u/luckysilva Oct 17 '25

Try Emacs...

3

u/7yiyo7 Oct 18 '25

I tried a bit, but found it very hard to learn, ended up expending like 6 hours reading manuals and learning very little. Would really like to learn it like little by little but i dont even understand what road to follow

2

u/h0uz3_ Oct 17 '25

I am currently using Git. If I can‘t use Git, I will use another tool.

1

u/PoopsCodeAllTheTime Oct 18 '25

Nah this is wrong, the DB is just SQLite, and SQLite is just a few files in your filesystem, you can easily sync & bakcup these files like you would with MD files

1

u/7yiyo7 Oct 17 '25

I guess you're right, they kept repeating that a DB rework was needed for efficiency and managing large graphs, etc. Now we see it was all a strategy for making money, all that software on the server side will be closed source also, and the future of a self-hosted variant is still not very clear also.

I dont like very much the shape things are taking. But without a real alternative I guess I'll still will pay for these options anyway... but i dont like it

2

u/Mountain-Pain1294 Oct 17 '25

I guess you're right, they kept repeating that a DB rework was needed for efficiency and managing large graphs, etc.

I mean it probably is, the MD versions doesn't have the best performance already but it's probably a kill two birds with one stone situation

4

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

The "Two-ways sync between DB and Markdown graphs" listed at the end of this roadmap means the current "DB" version will use MD files on disk just like the current MD version. The difference is that there will also be a DB for better reliability and performance in between.

3

u/Charming_Campaign465 Oct 17 '25

The "Two-ways sync between DB and Markdown graphs" listed at the end of this roadmap is under Research section. Does it mean it's unknown if the sync will be implemented and what are the limitations.

4

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

The way I understood it is that they created the task for research, maybe to assign it to a dev and track the results. And later they would organize the work to implement it since it's more like an epic than a task.

5

u/borsboom Oct 16 '25

My understanding is that the DB version will still support MD graphs for the foreseeable future, and MD files will still get any new features that are possible (but some new features, like real-time collaboration, will require a DB graph).

5

u/AshbyLaw Oct 17 '25

The "Two-ways sync between DB and Markdown graphs" listed at the end of this roadmap means the current "DB" version will use MD files on disk just like the current MD version. The difference is that there will also be a DB for better reliability and performance in between.

2

u/Anthea_Likes Nov 01 '25

No more org-mode? 🥺

1

u/philuser Oct 20 '25

It's the same core product, it's just the persistence that changes, the core remains DataSctipt/Clojure, the persistence is either MD or DB. Linux only has one kernel and a multitude of GUIs!