Skip to content

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

Uncategorized
116 66 778

Diese Artikel könnten Dich auch interessieren.

  • 0 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    50 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    trwnh@mastodon.social but as:Public is not a dereferenceable URL. Needs to be special cased anyway. End of the day nothing changes, it needs special handling for all the cases anyway. cc silverpill@mitra.social
  • APx is finally available on crates.io / docs.rs

    Uncategorized activitypub rust apx
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    silverpill@mitra.social nice job! Congratulations on the release now you must maintain it for free forever.
  • Should I present a topic at FediCon?

    Uncategorized fedicon activitypub fosdem
    3
    0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    rwg@aoir.social I'm not actually sure! You'll have to ask reiver@mastodon.social about that one. Let me know too!
  • #activitypub #mastodev

    Uncategorized activitypub mastodev
    3
    1
    0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    thisismissem@hachyderm.io oh god do I have to handle this too
  • Unicode in handles

    ActivityPub unicode activitypub
    15
    0 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    123 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
    9 Beiträge
    64 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    I suppose you're right in a way. The context owner is not supposed to be set by someone other than the context owner. It's a fallback mechanism intended for better compatibility with Mastodon. When a group is addressed and it is one of the local NodeBB categories, it will assume control If it is another group that it knows about but isn't same origin to the author, then no category is assumed.
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    150 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
    77 Aufrufe
    FrankMF
    Kommt echt an Ich bin verblüfft LOL