[-] jessel@universeodon.com 1 points 1 year ago

@olavf @lemmy @Gargron +1 to private and secret groups. super important to have as there are topics that aren’t appropriate to be discussed publicly so i’m hoping the protocol supports it soon if not already

[-] jessel@universeodon.com 1 points 1 year ago

@shlee @lemmy @Gargron yeah i was thinking about the last one

[-] jessel@universeodon.com 2 points 1 year ago

@jdp23 will take a read through this, thanks!

[-] jessel@universeodon.com 3 points 1 year ago

@mariusor i guess help me understand how we, as mastodon users, can browse and interact with lemmy content without having to use their UI or account?

if i follow @lemmy on mastodon, it seems to be a feed of unstructured replies and comments that don’t have logical cohesion. is that because they are not using the Group objects in ActivityPub? and/or the Mastodon client doesn’t support Groups natively?

5
submitted 1 year ago by jessel@universeodon.com to c/lemmy@lemmy.ml

question for the #lemmy users and #activitypub developers out there:

now that @lemmy is seeing a spike in interest, and @Gargron has said he's interested in building out groups on #mastodon - this seems like the right time to update ActivityPub protocol to support groups natively. anyone looking into this?

lemmy's integration into mastodon is pretty janky right now and can be a lot better!

jessel

joined 2 years ago