Skip to content

As far as I understand, most (all?) fediverse #ActivityPub software does not use the Client-to-server protocol from the specs (https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#client-to-server-interactions) but rather use custom APIs instead.

ActivityPub Test Kategorie
62 19 1.9k
  • 0 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    75 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    pfefferle@mastodon.social only one way to find out
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    69 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    silverpill@mitra.social I thought about checking against the outbox, but there's a potential race condition that could occur if I receive the Create(Note) at roughly the same time as the community, but the community hasn't processed the activity yet. In that scenario, the activity would not be in the outbox for checking. The same thing would happen if there was some out-of-band check for object membership in a collection (not that there is one right now).
  • 0 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    200 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
    17 Beiträge
    236 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @esoteric_programmer@social.stealthy.club that's likely because GtS handles summary as a content warning for everything. The whole summary and content warning business is in flux right now, so hopefully a standard will be set soon.
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    64 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @mastodonmigration@mastodon.online while this is a known workaround, I don't think it's a tenable long-term solution. You can have "real decentralization" without the quirks, too.
  • ActivityPub 5.6.0 for WordPress just shipped!

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie wordpress activitypub
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @obenland@mastodon.social wonderful, good work!
  • 0 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    162 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @philipp@social.anoxinon.de I kind of think this is really missing the forest for the trees if your rational is CO2 emissions... I mean, a far greater generator of CO2 emissions would be every single Mastodon instance caching every piece of media it sees...
  • Live testing of remote categories

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie activitypub nodebbactivityp
    63
    2
    0 Stimmen
    63 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @pfefferle@mastodon.social just wanted to poke you about this issue again. The latest updates to NodeBB now do a webfinger backcheck to ensure that the actor has a valid webfinger entry for their purported handle. If it does not, then the user is not properly created. Mastodon also does this. This check is probably for security as well as for preventing handle collisions. The multilingual plugin in conjunction with the ActivityPub plugin creates users that share the same handle, and that causes issues with federated content. For example, this article by @jonvt@vivaldi.com will load up just fine in Mastodon, but this japanese article by @akira@vivaldi.com will not, because that second article's attributedTo is https://vivaldi.com/ja/?author=176, which fails that check (the author's ID is actually https://vivaldi.com?author=176 as per the handle backcheck) cc @AltCode