Gregory's Server@astrojuanlu @erlend @fediversenews I'm also a little worried so see so little mention of @forgefed, and especially the idea that it's something that will be used for some small parts later without necessarily considering compatibility from the beginning. I hope I'm just misinterpreting what's been written and that ForgeFed compatibility will be taken into account at every stage.
|
4 comments
 @erlend @caesar @astrojuanlu Yeah, I also emailed the developer to make sure, this isn't a problem (for now) @caesar @astrojuanlu @erlend @fediversenews A contributor discussed @forgefed in the comments on that issue a few hours ago: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/epics/11247#note_1529285198 @caesar @astrojuanlu @erlend @fediversenews @forgefed Excerpt: “Yep, I saw it, it looks awesome. :) It will be a good protocol [for] cross-instance discussions and merge requests. The current [proposal] allow people on the fediverse to follow activity on Gitlab instances, without write access,[…] I prefer to avoid using an extension of ActivityPub Given how ForgeFed already did all the design work, I don't see any reason not to use it” |
@caesar @astrojuanlu it’s not mentioned on that page, but there are many amicable mentions of it elsewhere in the long tail of this development: https://toot.matereal.eu/@schmittlauch/110949571279023513