agnos.is Forums

Hey [email protected] 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 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

@AltCode This should be fixed in the upcoming v4.3.0. https://github.com/NodeBB/NodeBB/issues/13352 It won't proactively remove the duplicates, but they'll be pruned out within ~7 days.

@AltCode One significant potential issues with listing all followed categories in the same kind of layout as /categories is the below-the-fold effect, or the page-2 effect as one might have called it in earlier times. Whatever categories end up falling below a certain scroll distance will just never been seen by most users. If you follow a lot of categories, the ones that end up closer to the bottom of the list than the top will just end up ignored. It doesn't encourage participation, and it also doesn't discourage following a lot of categories that you don't actually care about. And follow relationships are very important under ActivityPub, since they dictate content flow. Bringing in a lot of remote content that no one on the local forum is actually reading or engaging with is very wasteful. An easily accessible compact list might be better, with different sorting options so that users can choose to have categories with new content float to the top. Usually with forum categories, you want the ordering to be static, but that expectation won't necessarily be there for just a list.

I asked in that issue whether Lemmy finds community via to/cc (it does). Does PieFed do the same? Yes - PieFed does the same. It looks in 'audience', then 'cc', then 'to'. It has to, to support all the platforms that haven't adopted 'audience. It's a convenient field, but PieFed won't be affected if Lemmy goes through with removing it. Would this also open up the possibility of a topic/context being part of multiple audiences/communities? Not at present. If you do something like cc: [community1, community2] it will only go to community1 (on both Lemmy and PieFed). There's so many activities that are effectively duplicates, both in normal operation and when platforms are bugged (both Lemmy and Mastodon have gone through phases of sending the same activity multiple times), that you need a way to make sure you're only processing one. On PieFed, this is done by having a UNIQUE constraint of the 'ap_id' column of the Post table (the ap_id of your post is https://community.nodebb.org/post/103806), so it means you can't have the same post in more than one community.

@hamishcampbell @ricmac @evanprodromou @julian Thanks for your kind words. I won't interrupt your discussion with Julian anymore. I hope you reach some accord!

@[email protected] no worries, and thanks! Will do.

@[email protected] if edits from PieFed aren't reflected here that may be a bug.

1. +1. I will replace webfinger address recommendation with a warning about possible compatibility issues.2. I think observers (and other Application actors on the server) should use a shared key.

Always something with my fingers. The number of times a problem I have is because of a typo...

> Doesn't this mean Mastodon users et al will no longer get boost notifications when their posts are reshared into a topic? Correct, only OP will be shared. Unless I am mistaken this is how Lemmy implemented it. Announce-ing activities only, and one single Announce(Note) for compatibility with Mastodon.

@julian FEP-171b has its own way to backfill, also via context, but it is a collection of activities (such as Create).I am currently trying to figure out how to make Containers compatible with NodeBB and others.

@johnonolan @julian @matt @pfefferle more than meets the eye

I tried to sync @[email protected] with @testing-ground.

@[email protected] yes, Lemmy has a local representation of this category, and sends the post here. I see that it's addressed to the category and automatically slot it in

@[email protected] a VPS can be had from DigitalOcean or Vultr quite economically (although I know that isn't always the case in some countries) You can also use our referral link for an account credit too!

I recognize that this makes the Delete activity work differently for S2S than it does C2S, which is to say that a user or client cannot distinguish between "soft delete" and "hard delete" this way. Otherwise, the "cache invalidation" idea is a sensible one.