Skip to content

Unicode in handles

ActivityPub
15 6 151

Diese Artikel könnten Dich auch interessieren.

  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 7.2.0 – Follow ups

    Uncategorized activitypub blocks fediverse followers following
    2
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    pfefferle@mastodon.social oh interesting! > We’ve also made it easier to follow people from other sites. When you click “Follow” on someone else’s blog, you’ll now be taken to your own site to complete it. It keeps things simple and familiar, even when you start following someone from another site. How do you know the user pressing the button has a WordPress site?
  • 0 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    smallcircles@social.coop if you're not able to consume dev discussions on the fediverse and have to continually rely on people creating content on your platform then you need to raise that as an issue on your platform software.
  • Backfilling Conversations: Two Major Approaches

    ActivityPub activitypub fep 7888 f228 171b
    26
    0 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    140 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    > One weakness I have noticed in NodeBB's current federation is that posts which are in reply to a topic (e.g. a Lemmy comment) show up as individual threads until (or if) the root post of that topic shows up in the local NodeBB. No, Lemmy does not implement either strategy, they rely on 1b12 only. If NodeBB is receiving parts of a topic that don't resolve up to the root-level post that might be something we can fix. I'll try to take a look at it.
  • Just for fun...

    Uncategorized activitypub
    4
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    steve@social.technoetic.com only 19/20, I am disappoint. [image: 1752346993311-1000010307.png]
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    188 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
  • ActivityPub for forums looks neat!

    Uncategorized activitypub federation discourse fediverse
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    82 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    NodeBB is gearing up for a major release this month that brings full two way federation and content discoverability to forums as well! We've been working on it all last year! @activitypub
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    97 Aufrufe
    FrankMF
    Kommt echt an Ich bin verblüfft LOL