Calling umami spyware is.. reaching.

just because he put it in his nostr library doesn't mean he put it in the protocol but i don't like him anyway, you get to know things about a person by how they write code

Do you mean njump.me ? I was explaining Nostr to a friend yesterday and I realized I don’t know the answer to this: Are there code maintainers for the protocol? Are there ways to deny new code rather than just not integrate it into clients? Thank you !

Could you elaborate?

Fork it? That repo isn't "the protocol" there is a whole other repo used for nips, isn't there?

write, wail, talk, etc. gr8 days m! all the best

Umami (can also be selfhosted) is used for analytics, but it is designed to be more private than GA and collects anonymized data, at a much smaller scale.

This is also moot because "the protocol" isn't being altered and OP is clueless.

love the fact that people can dislike each other and still create something together in this trustless world

There is just "the protocol". In order to get a client or a relay they should implement (some of) the NIPs described on

GitHub

GitHub - nostr-protocol/nostr: a truly censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter that has a chance of working

a truly censorship-resistant alternative to Twitter that has a chance of working - nostr-protocol/nostr

Whatever else a client or relay adds is up to the developers of said client/relay. This might be nothing up to extreme cases of tracking. Therefore it would be wise to choose an open source client and relay so you can verifyyou are not running any kind of spyware.

So do I understand it right that anyone can write and publish nips ? What about nip1 ? Can it be changed and under what conditions?

No the github link i send is just the documentation of the protocol. See it as a blueprint. It merely describes how clients and relays communicate. Just like for example HTTP. People can suggest changes to it by creating a pull request though in general I think specifically the non optional NIPs like NIP-1 cannot be changed easily by simply creating a PR. Much discussion will be needed, specifically if it is a backwards incompatible change (e.g.: a mandatory field is removed, as this would stop current clients and relays from functioning properly). There are a number of people that can then approve this PR. Though of one of them would blindly do this others would point this out, just like with bitcoin for example. By changing NIP-1 you only changed the blueprint, no existing client or relay is affected.

write, walk,talk

ya, it's cool! i think a lot of the dislike is from interpretation. People seem to either get it wrong sometimes or just touchy. Still figuring it out & trying to just have some fun for now. i know @ times i have assumed & had to check myself. all the best Gar bear

Is there a place to look up who and how many people can approve non-optional nips at any time ?

No unfortunately on github you cannot see who is able to merge a PR. This would be at least the owner of the repo, and then you can configure your repo to allow more people to do this. The only way to see this is if you have admin rights yourself in the settings of the repo where you can maintain a list of people who can do this. For the protocol repo i think this is a handful of people. Github does not know about the meaning of the files. So changing a mandatory NIP (which is written in MarkDown) has no special meaning over optional NIPs. These are just files in a git repo.