Skip to content

Hide the "Moved" arrow

ActivityPub Test Kategorie
11 6 1
  • 0 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    ludrol@szmer.infoL
    Duplicating the object would mean the discussion is split between objects. The ideal implementation would be the same object present in multiple categories/communities. Is there desire for this in the threadiverse? If the link goes to a controversial news article and it's get posted into pro- and against- community/group the comments will spiral out of control and it won't be a pleasant place. Maybe it could be implemented as a toggle per group/instance within one fedi software. It shouldn't be in Activity Pub protocol.
  • 0 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @renchap@oisaur.com how does RFC9421 differ from Mastodon's existing support for HTTP Signatures? Does this mean you're moving away from cavage-12? That's important to know, and if you're looking for an implementor to handle double-knocking, that is something I can put together for you.. we don't do it at current.
  • Update error Nodebb v4.3.0

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie
    2
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @KirillEvo seems that also deleting package-lock.json will also work.
  • 0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    S
    Im running Node 23 on my production install
  • 0 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    @dansup@mastodon.social no, NodeBB v4 always reports activitypub in protocols, even if disabled. I can update that so it's dependent on the global switch, but it's still possible to have AP enabled but not have any categories federating. I'm just wondering whether FediDB found the forums because content got federated, or whether there was some proactive nodeinfo crawling, that's all. cc @jaz@mastodon.iftas.org
  • Post flair in PieFed

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie fediverse
    4
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    julian@community.nodebb.orgJ
    I think the FEP process is overly complicated for what it is, but it's definitely helpful if you have multiple implementors on board. The easiest (but least accessible) solution is to document something on your own site, but that lacks the social proof that a finalized FEP has. Just some food for thought I'm looking to create an FEP for cross posting and would love to get the entire threadiverse dev community involved.
  • 0 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    baris@community.nodebb.orgB
    Since we are using https://github.com/Psifi-Solutions/csrf-sync it creates a session whenever a guest loads the forum to set config.csrf_token. Although we used that in 3.7.0 as well so not sure if that's your issue or not. Sessions are also created for guests if you turn on "Allow guests to increase topic view counts", to track which topics they've viewed.
  • Updates to the world page

    ActivityPub Test Kategorie nodebbactivityp nodebb
    32
    2
    1 Stimmen
    32 Beiträge
    255 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.