 Here's an interesting question. To me, anyway :-) As the #fediverse grows, and an ever-broader set of apps talks #ActivityPub and extensions to #ActivityPub, how do we ensure that the overall architecture of the system remains consistent? Example from the past: WebDAV used HTTP extensibility as it was intended, but arguably they deviated from the architectural principles. (A consequence: it remains a niche and many apps that could've used it don't) Who else is worrying about things like that? 6 comments
@hrefna ideas what we can do? Somehow we need to aggregate stuff (people, issues, best practices …) to be able to identify and strive for globally better options than if everybody just were to work independently and thus just optimize locally for whatever the world looks like from their point of view. @hrefna As the guy who ran a site called metamodel.com for many years, I relate :-) Random archive snapshot: https://web.archive.org/web/20071014230454/http://metamodel.com/  @J12t We do that by kicking Google out of the W3C, along with every megacorp that pretends your dream is to watch more advertisement :) @J12t Ran into this problem head-first, and decided the time wasn't ripe for me to develop for the fediverse just yet. |
Gregory's Server
@J12t I definitely do. It's one of what I think of as the big existential threats.
Specifically what I am less concerned about is how extensions get used and more that that integration requires Θ(n^2) testing. It encourages lack of interoperability: it's one thing to say "I am doing something deliberately a bit odd," it is another to need to _either_ do a lot of odd things just to talk to anyone else _or_ just say "screw it we're integrating with mastodon and others can figure it out."