Let’s say we go for it, how you will differentiate from Notion, for example? What you will write on a home page to explain the benefits?
BTW, we are working on 2-ways Jira sync now and I hope we will release it in the next few weeks.
Most likely it will make other 2-ways integration cases easier.
2-way sync can be challenging, it depends on requirements. For example, if you need to sync only Name and Status fields, it is easy to do. But if you want to sync text, comments threads, etc, it is becoming very complex.
Definitely a great question! I’m done with my prior consulting job now, so I’m happy to work with you guys to figure this out. (note I am not a marketing/sales person, so not my area of expertise, but I’ll try! )
Sure, makes sense. “Requirements” vary. So I’d favor a phased roll-out, starting with what is easy, and showing a list of other types of content sorted by its difficulty to implement and potential timeline/intention to do so. Ideally this would be shown as a ? on all Synced DBs/entities, and/or even on non-editable fields to explain why. I think it would be non-ideal to hold off on any broad (supported in multiple integrations) bi-directional sync until/unless a lot of fields/data types can be implemented (i.e. not for a while because it’s hard). Do what you can now, it’s better than nothing and perhaps gives you more signal from users as to how much they like/appreciate it/want more, and maybe also gives you a start on the work to implement more (seems like this is already happening, at least).
Would it be possilble to OSS that integration to serve as “do as we do” tutorial ?
I feel current integrations guide lacks example of complex syncings code and jira integration will cover that perfeclty.
And if it’s 2 way you get to save time on writing a guide - just point people to that integration as example. At least in the beginning for many it would be sufficient.
Bidirectional sync would also be interesting for calendars.
Even if work happens in Fibery, meetings still needs to be scheduled in outlook (or gcal), and bidirectional sync would make timeblocking time for tasks easier.
Also, speaking of timeblocking, other improvements would be the possibility of adjusting duration of a timeblock by dragging the lower-end of the event in the calendar.
Also, the calendar view is missing a view of overdue entities.
p.s. strong focus on bi-directional being available also for outlook, not only for gcal. This is one of the weaknesses of clickup: no bi-directional for outlook
Two-way sync with Jira is released yesterday.
We will add more two-way connectors based on feedback.
When it comes to 2 way sync, is the goal to differentiate? Or do you primarily want to remove as many impeding objections as possible?
Overall, Fibery and Notion are quite similar. I think every Notion enthusiast can also fall in love with Fibery once everything is in place.
In my opinion Notion really wins based on integrations. But for me personally, Fibery wins based on:
- support & open culture
- ease of use
- automations (although I have never used the automations in Notion)
- vision and roadmap
Maybe we can create a more fact based overview based on the workspaces that have been build
I am building a very comprehensive workspace in Fibery. It might be interesting to explore what the actual differences are between Notion and Fibery based on my use case when I’m finished.
As far as I know, I can’t build in Notion what I now have built in Fibery. But I can’t back that up with hard facts because I haven’t used Notion for complex stuff in the last 12 months.
I do know for sure that I can’t build it in ClickUp (but that’s not a surprise).
It depends on the requirements and on the use case. For calendars, PKM, CRM I think that a simple 2 way integration can be sufficient for a lot use case cases.
Because the goal is not to have ‘one tool to replace them all’.
But I do think that Fibery + 2 way sync integrations = the ultimate system from which you can manage 90% of your business.
And for details and missing info you can then always go to the source application.
After a quick scan; does Notion even have 2 way sync? For most applications not as far as I can see. So then that can be a USP.
Trello, Notion and Clickup are likely the most relevant apps to make two-way sync as far as I hear people around me. But I think the bug about body text in clickup is still to be resolved first.
I think it is unlikely that there will be two-way-sync for these platforms any time soon. Fibery is trying to be a replacement for them, so there is less incentive to develop a two-way-sync that would imply that users keep Fibery and Trello (or F and N, F and CU etc.)
I think it’s more likely that the product team would focus on adding features to Fibery that would make it less and less likely that a user needs to also use T/N/CU.
If Fibery chose for a strategy that makes other apps obsolete, it will have to compete with the quality offered by those other apps.
Currently the integration of Notion, Clickup and Trello is syncing read only data. The actual editing of these apps data need to happen in clickup, notion or trello.
I think that the current trend in collaborative tools is to be connected to external tools in a meaningful way, so that each tool has their unique quality in itself and in a whole system of interconnected tools.
By the way, I would be very happy if Fibery can keep up with all most important features that those other apps offer, but am curious if Fibery aims at a similar kind of Clickup capital funding or as Notion. Has anyting about the future vision and strategy of Fibery has been posted somewhere?
Any update for this, I’m stucking in using google calendar to navigate things
Currently I using Fibery as People Database includes interaction: meeting, appointments, personal information and using Google calendar as recurring and visual alls. I feel really annoy with just 1 way sync: Google calendar → Fibery only (Readonly in fibery) which means all the things can be controled in fibery as center, it must be done in from other app outside.
Example: I have daily meeting in google calendar, but the content/ the plan I need to do in fibery
Wanted to chime in and strongly request a bi-directional Hubspot integration. We’re a digital agency and product development company that uses Hubspot to market, sell and invoice our clients but is considering Fibery as a platform that can manage the production side AFTER things are sold but BEFORE they get invoiced.
New lead comes in, our sales team uses Hubspot to sell them our services as a retainer, we use Fibery to actually manage that retainer and schedule and deliver those services and then we tell Hubspot what was done so it can invoice the client via it’s quickbooks integration and communicate with the client about what was done (release notes, summary of services, when next iteration/release is scheduled, etc).
Have anyone considering to use GPTs to write for each bi-directional integrations ? The need of this feature seem a lot but overload with current fibery team right now
Can’t we solve this with iPaaS or something similar that performs two way data sync out of the box ? I’ve been looking for a solution for some time now. I found an open source platform for which it’s easy to build connectors : Contributing to Airbyte | Airbyte Documentation. The only issue is that is not two-way sync. If we want two-way sync we need to implement two unidirectional sync, which becomes complex (conflict resolution, infinite loop issues, etc).
I suggest we propose here all similar solutions with the following criteria:
- Easy to build a connector
- Two way sync
- Open source or not
That’s a very interesting tool I had not seen before. My team almost entirely uses N8N though also occasionally Pipedream. Airbyte seems interesting. What do you think of it? It calls N8N a Marketing Analytics connector - but what does it bring to that table that is not already in N8N?
N8N is opensource.
Airbyte is an ELT while N8N is iPass, though it seems like both could have their place. We use N8N and it’s pretty amazing. I learned about it from another user here.
I 100% support 2-way sync!!
Theoretically it is already possible with the REST API and webhooks (REST API to push data into Fibery from external and webhooks to update external when changes are made in Fibery), but preventing endless loops and data loss take very, very careful planning.
Simply extending the Integrations API to do 2-way is by far the best long term solution.
Agree that 2-way for other apps like Trello, ClickUp, etc. does not make business sense, BUT a 2-way Integrations API to allow devs to integrate Fibery to Legacy or in-house systems definitely makes business sense. It would greatly ease the transition to Fibery from legacy or in-house systems.
My vote would definitely be for adding 2-way to the existing Integrations API instead of adding it to specific integrations.
I don’t think there is any such thing as a generic 2-way integration API. Fibery has an API that allows you to create/update/delete data in Fibery, and it does have mechanisms (e.g. webhooks) that allow external services to be notified when events occur in Fibery.
The design and programming of the actual actions to be taken in the external system (using that system’s API) in reaction to Fibery events will vary significantly from tool to tool and this is where the hard work lies.
Fibery already as a pretty good Integrations API and implementing it for having external read only data inside Fibery was quick and easy enough. (External was Laravel in my case.)
It already has an external Type to Entity mapping as well as field mapping.
Adding an update endpoint (similar to the updates posted to webhooks maybe) is a logical next step and then just leave the intricacies of using it in a particular use case up to the external developers.
This could even unlock a whole new market where external devs could focus on functionality while using Fibery as UI. Just think about the value it would add and how many new customers it may unlock.
Simple - if the external system publishes an update endpoint (returned by the config endpoint?), allow changes in Fibery and post to that endpoint every time something changes.
PS: the schema endpoint will have to allow a ‘readonly?’ attribute on fields, so that Fibery knows which fields may or may not be edited on the Fibery side.