Skip to content

Live testing of remote categories

ActivityPub Test Kategorie
63 10 2.1k
  • What drew you to ActivityPub?

    ActivityPub activitypub dotsocial blogs
    5
    0 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    0 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
    5 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    silverpill@mitra.social I wasn't aware that there were sections pertaining to context. I'll have to review more closely.
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    jsit@social.coop Ghost? NodeBB? Just to name a couple
  • APx is finally available on crates.io / docs.rs

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie activitypub rust apx
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    36 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    silverpill@mitra.social nice job! Congratulations on the release now you must maintain it for free forever.
  • 0 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    211 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
    532 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
  • Peertube....

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie peertube activitypub
    12
    1
    0 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    234 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @mario@hub.somaton.com thanks, I tested that payload and it successfully edited the post, so at least from the payload point of view there is no issue. Perhaps there is a problem with the http signature on update? Is that handled differently than a create?
  • 0 Stimmen
    89 Beiträge
    3k Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @willi@social.tchncs.de 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!