Skip to content

Live testing of remote categories

ActivityPub Test Kategorie
63 10 2.1k
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    douginamug@mastodon.xyz this entire series right here https://seb.jambor.dev/posts/understanding-activitypub/
  • 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.
  • Pleroma Webfinger compatibility

    ActivityPub activitypub pleroma webfinger
    10
    0 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    335 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    trwnh@mastodon.social before, I was not sending Accept at all, now I am sending application/jrd+json.
  • Updates to the world page

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie nodebbactivityp nodebb
    32
    2
    1 Stimmen
    32 Beiträge
    855 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @projectmoon@forum.agnos.is said in Updates to the world page: > > > Also, are there plans to merge the federation synchronization and new remote category following stuff together into one cohesive set of functionality? Yes... the remote category functionality supercedes the category sync functionality in some ways, but there is still a use case for it. Most likely I will need to develop proper support for cross-posting (at least locally), and that would work well with the remote category functionality, so that topics are cross-posted to the synchronized category, instead of moved.
  • Moving topics

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie forumwg activitypub
    6
    0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    174 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @trwnh@mastodon.social yes, it is in regards to audience no longer being sent out by Lemmy. While it's defined in 1b12 it seems to be ancillary now, so updating that property would mean Lemmy would need to add support for it back.. not the end of the world.
  • ActivityPub 5.6.0 for WordPress just shipped!

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie wordpress activitypub
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    71 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @obenland@mastodon.social wonderful, good work!
  • 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?
  • Reconciling ActivityPub Deletes with NodeBB deletion

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie activitypub
    16
    0 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    290 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    Angus, while I haven't made the appropriate changes to NodeBB's implementation yet, I did draft an FEP including the changes we discussed. https://github.com/julianlam/feps/blob/main/fep/15c5/fep-15c5.md It is not PR'd upstream yet, but I will do so in the coming days unless there are some concerns.