Building and Playing with the Logseq DB Branch

I already build it before, but I'm just going to chat a bit while I try to see if I can get it to work on my Windows Desktop

[davemoore]

Thanks for your videos, they get my little brain a pondering.

I would be interested in watching a group of Logseq gurus, brainstorm about their user stories. What would the top ten story categories be? How does Logseq fulfill each story?

I am not a power user yet, but here’s a few of my stories:
- ## #U1: As a writer, using Logseq
- ### #S1: I need to be confident that the document I spend years writing will be safe.
- ### #S2: I need a journal that I can use in a manner which I am comfortable with.
- ## #U2: As a requirements engineer, using Logseq
- ### #S3: I don’t want to spend more time maintaining my documents than I do writing them.
- ### #S4: I need to isolate my projects, but still search across them.

[CarlosMartinez-mjcu]

Thank you for the video.

I am looking forward to be able to have Tana like tags in LogSeq. I have been thinking on switching to Tana because it is more convenient to use their supertags, but I prefer LogSeq for many other reasons like the ability to filter on backlinks at the bottom of a page and how it shows the last entries first. I did a live query on Tana for some scenarios but its not the same.

[MrBrutalmetalhead]

apt update only updates the cache. you need to also use apt upgrade or apt dist-upgrade to apply the updates. apt dist-upgrade auto removes old unused packages

[ax_zwk]

Just to make sure, this new version is still local right? No cloud involvement whatsoever?

[ArtiomNeganov]

I don't want to sound like a pessimist, but I feel like it's a wrong path. If they want fast loading - then lets write MD-related stuff in Rust/Go. But adding all these fields, types etc - is a path to nowhere. It adds big complexity and takes away flexibility of text documents. After all, is it a knowledge database software, or an applications prototyping tool? It looks like waste of time. As for collective editing - I agree with the expressed arguments. But I'd prefer to have a powerful, stable and featured single-user text database w/o any SQL/whatever database than a multi-user monster which pretends to be another Microsoft Access.