All the future Prismo revival work will be happening in this repository: https://github.com/mbajur/prismo Basic non-federated feature set is complete. Next step: federation! #fediverse #fedidev #activitypub

@silverpill thanks for the synopsis, I hadn't verified that assumption yet but glad it gets your stamp of disapproval

For any tut users out there (and if you don't know what it is, but you like both the Fediverse and terminal apps with vi-like keybindings, please go have a look): I've just pushed a couple of features that may be useful: General purpose :search command, to forward search queries to the instance and return results (posts, hashtags, users...) in a new pane. "Slash" / vi-like command to search within panes, allowing to quickly find e.g. notifications or posts by a certain user. Support for Mastodon-compatible quotes tut is not currently actively maintained though, and there are ongoing discussions about its future. For now, you can build tut from my fork (dev branch), which already has the features above, plus support for Markdown posts for Pleroma/Akkoma/Friendica instances, and I'm actively working on it. But in a near future I could merge my efforts with the elephant fork. #Fedidev

@prismo Haha thanks! I don't see any rooms in that space though?

@smallcircles@social.coop indeed, we cut off at the end of a sentence and link out to the full page for Articles (although in this case it's not very long) The cutoff is somewhere around 500 chars.

> @skavish@welley.social said: > > same header name, two languages that don't mix. Yes, I was worried about this. I was hoping maybe cavage parsers were smart enough to only parse header values that match expected inputs, so sending two Signature headers would work, but knowing what I know, that's wishful thinking <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f605.png?v=22426bb3280" title="" /> Thanks for the detailed reply! Looking forward to testing in the next few days.

@julian because most implementations still default to cavage, so it's the fastest path?

@boiert this was not philosophical. There is an actual AP implementation that looks for nodeinfo data to ensure the instance on the other end has the same application name, and refuses any follow if they don't. The actors are entirely compatible.

@nick I did, and I forgot to check! I will try today

@mario the code giveth, the code taketh away

Yep, I'm reading the paper draft: codeberg.org/spritely/ocappubI'm not exactly happy about the fact that the document hasn't been updated in years, and it's missing an answer to the most important question I have about OCapPup: what happens when one of the parties goes rogue, and decides to disobey a request to, for example, restrict relaying a message? I'm aware that the protocol is intended to encode consent permissions, but without an effective mechanism to actually have revocations enforced, it's barely an improvement over the current system.

@threadi Ideally I'm after something more "one click" like wordpress.com, rather than having to mess around installing it. If I have to install and configure it, I already have servers to put it on anyway.

@julian Thanks, Julian!

@hongminhee Added a comment https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/24079#issuecomment-4938693508

Hi @mayel@bonfire.cafe just wanted to run something by you. NodeBB caught an error when @ozoned@btfree.social followed another user from mastodon.social (who it is is irrelevant, who did the following is also irrelevant but I thought ozoned would find this amusing) Was it intentional that my instance was notified when ozoned followed someone unrelated to my instance? I'm adding in logic to handle this case now <img class="not-responsive emoji" src="https://activitypub.space/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/android/1f604.png?v=039c373c252" title="" />

@box464@mastodon.social congrats @rimu@piefed.social glad to see other fedi software straddling the fence like NodeBB

It's how Mastodon does it so I assume that's what was copied. Its not the activity itself per se. Its a re-creation of the follow activity I think. NodeBB doesn't send the whole thing either, just a recreated subset.

@oliviavespera@spacey.space why does a secondary relay need explicit permission from the source instance to have their content relayed? If the source content is public then there's no discussion to be had, there are no grey areas, the post is public. It sounds like you're trying to add in layers of privacy to a visibility scheme ("public") that does not have any.

@hongminheeOkay, this makes sense. I updated my implementation to support ap+ef61 scheme and also updated the FEP:https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/pulls/872/filesBoth schemes are allowed, but ap is RECOMMENDED. I don't expect the semantics to change. The most controversial part is the authority, which makes 'ap' URIs not compliant with RFC-3986, but I believe that we should push for the standardization of DID authorities. Plain DIDs are easier to read and you can copy-paste them without decoding. As far as I know, #atproto people also don't intend to encode their URI authorities.

@grishka@mastodon.social interesting, I wonder if they support context too