Skip to content

This is an interesting observation: I responded to someone's public post on a Mastodon (glitch) server as a private message (I have a toggle in my Compose interface that allows me to control that).

Uncategorized
2 2 0

Diese Artikel könnten Dich auch interessieren.

  • What drew you to ActivityPub?

    ActivityPub activitypub dotsocial blogs
    5
    0 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    > Getting a critical mass of people to create yet another account was always a major obstacle. I see and have experienced this effect time and time again, and we're getting closer and closer to the point where the protocol implementations can abstract away the messy bits. Gaining critical mass among devs is the first step!
  • Here's an idea.

    Uncategorized activitypub
    7
    0 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    benpate@mastodon.social Emissary interested? Har Har Har
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    dfyx@social.helios42.de because followers and outbox collections can be faked.
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    jsit@social.coop Ghost? NodeBB? Just to name a couple
  • Backfilling Conversations: Two Major Approaches

    ActivityPub activitypub fep 7888 f228 171b
    26
    0 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    97 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.
  • Fun with Federation: Lemmy edition

    ActivityPub nodebb lemmy activitypub
    5
    0 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    27 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!
  • Unicode in handles

    ActivityPub unicode activitypub
    15
    0 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    124 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    לאצי the usernames work fine locally (that is, on the site itself). It's when interoperating with other sites not running NodeBB where there are issues, it seems
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    151 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