Skip to content

Fun with Federation: Lemmy edition

ActivityPub
5 3 140

Diese Artikel könnten Dich auch interessieren.

  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    gyptazy@mastodon.gyptazy.com it's the kind of relay Pleroma uses, that's why I asked.
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    mapache@hachyderm.io just use NodeBB and call it a day
  • Bridge as a service...

    Uncategorized bridgyfed fediverse activitypub
    8
    0 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    snarfed.org@fed.brid.gy I wanted to tag you but I wasn't sure which account to tag
  • Long-form articles

    Uncategorized activitypub
    21
    0 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    41 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    feb@loma.ml well the great thing is the FEP is still a draft and your opinions are welcome cc jupiter_rowland@hub.netzgemeinde.eu silverpill@mitra.social
  • 7.2.0 – Follow ups

    Uncategorized activitypub blocks fediverse followers following
    2
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    10 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?
  • What drew you to ActivityPub?

    ActivityPub activitypub dotsocial blogs
    5
    0 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    35 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!
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    203 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
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    106 Aufrufe
    FrankMF
    Kommt echt an Ich bin verblüfft LOL