@kescher@catcatnya.com doesn't Pleroma? Or am I misremembering?
Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam: (darkphoenix@not.an.evilcyberhacker.net)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 07:55:16 JST darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam:
-
Embed this notice
:blobcathug: (jain@blob.cat)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 07:55:09 JST :blobcathug:
@darkphoenix thats a very bad idea, gargron put some weird stuff in the protocol, i would rather prefer if its defined by consensus by masto, *oma and *key devs -
Embed this notice
darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam: (darkphoenix@not.an.evilcyberhacker.net)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 07:55:14 JST darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam:
@kescher@catcatnya.com (I do wish the Masto API got pulled into the W3C spec tbh...)
-
Embed this notice
:blobcathug: (jain@blob.cat)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 08:30:47 JST :blobcathug:
@darkphoenix i can understand the critic but imho is gargron the wrong person to define that standard. There are enough fuckups in the history... thats the reason why i prefer more than one person to define a standard. -
Embed this notice
darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam: (darkphoenix@not.an.evilcyberhacker.net)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 08:30:49 JST darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam:
@Jain@blob.cat fine, make something vaguely backwards compatible but better specified then. but for better or worse we're kinda stuck with the vague shape of it now and I'd rather it be standardised than defined by one project and cloned by everyone else because it's the only meaningfully adopted C2S API
-
Embed this notice
Sexy Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 08:32:46 JST Sexy Moon
@darkphoenix @kescher the mastodon api fucking sucks, have you looked at it? :blobcathug: likes this. -
Embed this notice
:blobcathug: (jain@blob.cat)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 09:06:25 JST :blobcathug:
@darkphoenix :blobcatshrug2: i dont think so... how can you as a sharkkey user just say that you would prefer the Masto Client API as a standard...
The reason why nobody implements ActivityPub C2S is basically the individuality of the servers itself, Threading wouldnt be possible in the same way for *key and *oma, it is nearly insane to use the Masto client API as standard...
Tbh, how about properly fixing the S2S standard first and let every server have their own individuality by implementing additional/different Client API's which they need to fulfill their own special features?
It makes sense to unify S2S and C2S when you want to have every server exact with the same features but the main reason that the reality isnt like this is that devs dont want certain features and do want push their own stuff (and that isnt even a critic against gargron) -
Embed this notice
darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam: (darkphoenix@not.an.evilcyberhacker.net)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jan-2024 09:06:28 JST darkphoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_polyam:
@Jain@blob.cat oh yeah he definitely shouldn't. like what i'm suggesting is functionally taking it away from him and pulling it into a proper standards body - but for better or worse, whatever does become the standard will need to be based on and ideally backwards compatible with what he built, because it's kind of too late to fix the fact that it's literally the only C2S interface anybody uses. Nobody implements ActivityPub C2S, Misskey's own thing seems to be dying without anyone ever having meaningfully implemented it, and for better or worse Mastodon won't completely rewrite its client interface and it's the most common fedi software out there. So if we want a better, more standardised thing, we kinda have to start with that at this point I think, like it or not.
-
Embed this notice