Skip to content

NodeBB v4.0.0 — Federate good times, come on!

Uncategorized
116 66 598

Diese Artikel könnten Dich auch interessieren.

  • Fun with Federation: Lemmy edition

    ActivityPub nodebb lemmy activitypub
    5
    0 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    nutomic@lemmy.ml let me know if I got any of the details wrong. Much thanks to your team for the assist in debugging!
  • The backlog was bigger than I expected...

    Uncategorized lemmy nodebb
    13
    0 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    22 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    Depends on the project, and I imagine a lot of the smaller ones are your standard FOSS BDFL leadership. In my case I'll likely make a rough milestone list based off our NLNet memorandum and go from there.
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    rood@aus.social that... is actually not a bad idea If every account exposed their time zone, then your client or server could simply delay the post the appropriate amount until it's your time zone... 10pm their time, shows up 10pm your time. oooooh.
  • 0 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    pfefferle@mastodon.social only one way to find out
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    silverpill@mitra.social I thought about checking against the outbox, but there's a potential race condition that could occur if I receive the Create(Note) at roughly the same time as the community, but the community hasn't processed the activity yet. In that scenario, the activity would not be in the outbox for checking. The same thing would happen if there was some out-of-band check for object membership in a collection (not that there is one right now).
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    feditips@social.growyourown.services ahaldorsen@tutoteket.no feel free to reach out if you have trouble setting up or administering NodeBB. We're on the fediverse, and happy to be here!
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    112 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    Hey rimu@piefed.social thanks for responding (and sorry for the late reply!) I am not married to the Announce([Article|Note|Page]) approach, so I am definitely open to Create([Article|Note|Page]) with a back-reference. I think I went the former direction because there is a known fallback mechanism — the Announce is treated as a share/boost/repost as normal. However, sending the Create also is fine I think. However, do we need a backreference? In my limited research, it seems that Piefed, et al. picks the first Group actor and associates the post with that community. If I sent over a Create(Article) with two Group actors addressed, could Piefed associate the post with the first, and initiate a cross-post with the remaining Group actors? Secondly, is how to handle sync. 1b12 relies on communities having reciprocal followers in order for two-way synchronization to be established. On my end since I know it is cross-posted I will now send 1b12 activities to cross-posted communities, but can Piefed, et al. send 1b12 activities back as well, in the absence of followers? cc andrew_s@piefed.social nutomic@lemmy.ml melroy@kbin.melroy.org bentigorlich@gehirneimer.de
  • Test Post for @julian

    Uncategorized activitypub
    3
    0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    78 Aufrufe
    FrankMF
    Uups, next try https://nrw.social/deck/@FrankM/113606591981853331