Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
We Distribute
  1. Home
  2. Fediverse
  3. ActivityPub
  4. 1b12 vs Guppe groups

1b12 vs Guppe groups

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved ActivityPub
activitypub1b12guppe
22 Posts 10 Posters 290 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
    angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
    angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
    wrote on last edited by
    #9

    I recently switched the Discourse plugin back to only Announcing the first Create(Note) in a topic (Collection), but not replies, or updates, as announcing everything was causing issues with Mastodon.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
      angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
      angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
      wrote on last edited by
      #10
      julian:

      When I refactored my 1b12 implementation, I actually removed the second Announce(Object), but I think I will add it back.

      I would gently suggest that sending both Announce(Object) and Announce(Create(Object)) to all followers for the same content is not a good solution to the problem. Yes, other implementors can come up with ways to handle that (I just deployed the Discourse solution to this duplication to SoicalHub), but it's hardly ideal.

      julian@community.nodebb.orgJ 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
        julian:

        When I refactored my 1b12 implementation, I actually removed the second Announce(Object), but I think I will add it back.

        I would gently suggest that sending both Announce(Object) and Announce(Create(Object)) to all followers for the same content is not a good solution to the problem. Yes, other implementors can come up with ways to handle that (I just deployed the Discourse solution to this duplication to SoicalHub), but it's hardly ideal.

        julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
        julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
        julian@community.nodebb.org
        wrote on last edited by
        #11

        @angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks the other side of the coin is that Mastodon simply doesn't get the replies to a conversation, which decreases the utility of following a category, no?

        Rock and a hard place.

        Ironically this helps my case that Mastodon should implement conversational context and backfill 😏

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
          angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
          angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
          wrote on last edited by
          #12

          You're not wrong. I would make a PR to mastodon, but I fear it would languish in review for years. There has to be a better solution to this though.

          julian@community.nodebb.orgJ renchap@oisaur.comR 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks

            You're not wrong. I would make a PR to mastodon, but I fear it would languish in review for years. There has to be a better solution to this though.

            julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
            julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
            julian@community.nodebb.org
            wrote on last edited by
            #13

            I have updated NodeBB (develop, so v4.1 whenever it drops) so that it conforms with 1b12 per spec:

            • Only activities will be Announce'd
            • The plain object will be Announce'd if the activity is of type Create, and it is the top level post
            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
              julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
              julian@community.nodebb.org
              wrote on last edited by
              #14

              > a PR to Mastodon

              @angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks I would hold off on that in favour of a PR to introduce context serving and consumption (a la 7888). There are still some issues to work through, but I intend to have it upstreamed (via @frequency@frequency.app) once we settle on a semi-final implementation.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks

                You're not wrong. I would make a PR to mastodon, but I fear it would languish in review for years. There has to be a better solution to this though.

                renchap@oisaur.comR This user is from outside of this forum
                renchap@oisaur.comR This user is from outside of this forum
                renchap@oisaur.com
                wrote on last edited by
                #15

                I would advise not to outright open a PR to Mastodon, but reach out to us first and discuss what can be done, and what the plan for action should be.

                We want to solve this problem of replies, but it has many complex impacts (how do we represent a conversation in Mastodon ? What about backward compat ? What is required on upgrading ?)

                A contributor is working on improving reply fetching (https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/pull/32615) and we are making slow progress, but I guess this is orthogonal to those other context-related RFCs.

                I am not an ActivityPub expert and not the best person to discuss this, but we can have a call together and see what needs to be done to improve the situation in Mastodon.

                angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • renchap@oisaur.comR renchap@oisaur.com

                  I would advise not to outright open a PR to Mastodon, but reach out to us first and discuss what can be done, and what the plan for action should be.

                  We want to solve this problem of replies, but it has many complex impacts (how do we represent a conversation in Mastodon ? What about backward compat ? What is required on upgrading ?)

                  A contributor is working on improving reply fetching (https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/pull/32615) and we are making slow progress, but I guess this is orthogonal to those other context-related RFCs.

                  I am not an ActivityPub expert and not the best person to discuss this, but we can have a call together and see what needs to be done to improve the situation in Mastodon.

                  angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
                  angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA This user is from outside of this forum
                  angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #16

                  Hello @renchap, thanks for following up. I think the way to tackle this is a version of the following:

                  1. We agree on a normative approach to the use of context. <--- Discourse, NodeBB, Wordpress and others essentially agree on this already, but it would be helpful to clarify and include folks from Mastodon.
                  2. We develop a generalised implementation agenda. Generalised, but with the needs of different platforms in mind.
                  3. Individual implementers adapted the generalised implementation agenda to their specific circumstances. However that works with their individual development cycles / practices.

                  I suggest we start work on 1 and 2 now and discuss them both further in person at the next Threadiverse Working Group meeting at the start of March. The group was set up to address these questions.

                  @devnull @trwnh @pfefferle If you're on board with this, let's seize this rare opportunity of having the relevant players involved and finally settle this question so we can move forward. If so, could one of you please start a new topic in #activitypub:threadiverse-wg addressing where we're currently at with 1 as you're both better across this currently than I am.

                  cc @nutomic @silverpill

                  silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS julian@community.nodebb.orgJ 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks

                    Hello @renchap, thanks for following up. I think the way to tackle this is a version of the following:

                    1. We agree on a normative approach to the use of context. <--- Discourse, NodeBB, Wordpress and others essentially agree on this already, but it would be helpful to clarify and include folks from Mastodon.
                    2. We develop a generalised implementation agenda. Generalised, but with the needs of different platforms in mind.
                    3. Individual implementers adapted the generalised implementation agenda to their specific circumstances. However that works with their individual development cycles / practices.

                    I suggest we start work on 1 and 2 now and discuss them both further in person at the next Threadiverse Working Group meeting at the start of March. The group was set up to address these questions.

                    @devnull @trwnh @pfefferle If you're on board with this, let's seize this rare opportunity of having the relevant players involved and finally settle this question so we can move forward. If so, could one of you please start a new topic in #activitypub:threadiverse-wg addressing where we're currently at with 1 as you're both better across this currently than I am.

                    cc @nutomic @silverpill

                    silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS This user is from outside of this forum
                    silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS This user is from outside of this forum
                    silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #17
                    angus:

                    We agree on a normative approach to the use of context. <— Discourse, NodeBB, Wordpress and others essentially agree on this already, but it would be helpful to clarify and include folks from Mastodon.

                    I recently published a FEP that documents different implementations of context collection: https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/f228/fep-f228.mdDidn't know that Discourse also implements it. Just tested it - everything works as expected

                    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocksT This user is from outside of this forum
                      trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocksT This user is from outside of this forum
                      trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #18

                      Doesn't this mean Mastodon users et al will no longer get boost notifications when their posts are reshared into a topic? If you’re never actually resharing the post itself, this prevents cleanly tracking all shares.

                      julian@community.nodebb.orgJ 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
                        angus:

                        We agree on a normative approach to the use of context. <— Discourse, NodeBB, Wordpress and others essentially agree on this already, but it would be helpful to clarify and include folks from Mastodon.

                        I recently published a FEP that documents different implementations of context collection: https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/f228/fep-f228.mdDidn't know that Discourse also implements it. Just tested it - everything works as expected

                        julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        julian@community.nodebb.org
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #19

                        Silverpill, thanks for sharing that it works. It's odd because it doesn't work with NodeBB (I woke up this morning missing 4 replies); pulling one should've gotten all of them but I had to pull them one by one (and one of @trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocks's still can't make it in).

                        Sounds like an issue with me, but I'll take a closer look this morning.

                        silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocksA angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks

                          Hello @renchap, thanks for following up. I think the way to tackle this is a version of the following:

                          1. We agree on a normative approach to the use of context. <--- Discourse, NodeBB, Wordpress and others essentially agree on this already, but it would be helpful to clarify and include folks from Mastodon.
                          2. We develop a generalised implementation agenda. Generalised, but with the needs of different platforms in mind.
                          3. Individual implementers adapted the generalised implementation agenda to their specific circumstances. However that works with their individual development cycles / practices.

                          I suggest we start work on 1 and 2 now and discuss them both further in person at the next Threadiverse Working Group meeting at the start of March. The group was set up to address these questions.

                          @devnull @trwnh @pfefferle If you're on board with this, let's seize this rare opportunity of having the relevant players involved and finally settle this question so we can move forward. If so, could one of you please start a new topic in #activitypub:threadiverse-wg addressing where we're currently at with 1 as you're both better across this currently than I am.

                          cc @nutomic @silverpill

                          julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                          julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                          julian@community.nodebb.org
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #20

                          @angus@socialhub.activitypub.rocks will do. There has been some movement on this recently and I'd love to keep it going (and keep Mastodon in the loop).

                          @renchap@oisaur.com, not to worry, I don't plan on making a PR without running it by your team first. I know these things take discussion 😅

                          I have my own thoughts on Jonny's reply collection backfill, although I will put those thoughts to paper later on.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • julian@community.nodebb.orgJ julian@community.nodebb.org

                            Silverpill, thanks for sharing that it works. It's odd because it doesn't work with NodeBB (I woke up this morning missing 4 replies); pulling one should've gotten all of them but I had to pull them one by one (and one of @trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocks's still can't make it in).

                            Sounds like an issue with me, but I'll take a closer look this morning.

                            silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS This user is from outside of this forum
                            silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocksS This user is from outside of this forum
                            silverpill@socialhub.activitypub.rocks
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #21
                            julian:

                            It's odd because it doesn't work with NodeBB (I woke up this morning missing 4 replies); pulling one should've gotten all of them but I had to pull them one by one (and one of @trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocks's still can't make it in).

                            This is likely related to the problem I described in another thread:

                            Link Preview Image
                            Federated SocialHub Categories

                            SocialHub admins can federate categories, making categories accessible in the fediverse. This is an overview of current ActivityPub actors that you can follow and participate in from the Fediverse. SocialHub Categor…

                            favicon

                            SocialHub (socialhub.activitypub.rocks)

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocksT trwnh@socialhub.activitypub.rocks

                              Doesn't this mean Mastodon users et al will no longer get boost notifications when their posts are reshared into a topic? If you’re never actually resharing the post itself, this prevents cleanly tracking all shares.

                              julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              julian@community.nodebb.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              julian@community.nodebb.org
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #22

                              > 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.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups