[investigation] take a look at the viability of groups

floatingghost commented

2022-06-26 17:39:27 +00:00

Owner

this is probably the most requested feature ever, and it should probably be looked at properly

it won't be easy, and will likely require collaboration from everyone (that is, mainline, mastodon, misskey, etc)

the first step in this is figuring out what people actually mean by the word "groups" and what functionality this should incorporate

then we will need to model the AP for them, and the governance structure internally (i.e whomst admins them etc etc)

the scope of this issue covers the high-level design only, and not the implementation details which will be covered later

what do people want/need from a group?

this is probably the most requested feature _ever_, and it should probably be looked at properly it won't be easy, and will likely require collaboration from everyone (that is, mainline, mastodon, misskey, etc) the first step in this is figuring out what people actually mean by the word "groups" and what functionality this should incorporate then we will need to model the AP for them, and the governance structure internally (i.e whomst admins them etc etc) the scope of this issue covers the high-level design only, and not the implementation details which will be covered later what do people want/need from a group?

👍 3

floatingghost added this to the New Features project 2022-06-26 17:39:32 +00:00

norm commented

2022-07-09 09:29:39 +00:00

Contributor

The way I see it, there's basically two kinds of "groups" that people are talking about:

GNU Social-style groups: Basically like a mailing list where one can subscribe to that group, and everyone subbed to that group receives messages that are sent to that group.
Circles like those in Google+. People in such groups can send private messages to that group and everyone gets those messages, almost like a group chat.

My idea would be to have both the broadcast functionality of (1) and group messaging stuff of (2). Group owners (and maybe moderators depending on how granular we want roles to be) can do things like control who can join the group and be able to kick bad members out, and also whether it's public or not.

The way I see it, there's basically two kinds of "groups" that people are talking about: 1. GNU Social-style groups: Basically like a mailing list where one can subscribe to that group, and everyone subbed to that group receives messages that are sent to that group. 2. Circles like those in Google+. People in such groups can send private messages to that group and everyone gets those messages, almost like a group chat. My idea would be to have both the broadcast functionality of (1) and group messaging stuff of (2). Group owners (and maybe moderators depending on how granular we want roles to be) can do things like control who can join the group and be able to kick bad members out, and also whether it's public or not.

👍 3

loweel commented

2022-07-14 13:49:23 +00:00

Just my two cents, makes sense maybe check how Lemmy implemented groups, to be consistent. Lemmy is a federated forum, supporting their actors may be a good idea for a better fediverse.

fristi commented

2022-07-26 12:26:08 +00:00

Contributor

The way I see it, there's basically two kinds of "groups" that people are talking about:

GNU Social-style groups: Basically like a mailing list where one can subscribe to that group, and everyone subbed to that group receives messages that are sent to that group.

Circles like those in Google+. People in such groups can send private messages to that group and everyone gets those messages, almost like a group chat.

Seconding this. I would recommend using different names for the two to keep them apart, I am well in favor of calling the latter "circles" much like Google did. That way people will know instantly what to expect.

> The way I see it, there's basically two kinds of "groups" that people are talking about: > > 1. GNU Social-style groups: Basically like a mailing list where one can subscribe to that group, and everyone subbed to that group receives messages that are sent to that group. > 2. Circles like those in Google+. People in such groups can send private messages to that group and everyone gets those messages, almost like a group chat. Seconding this. I would recommend using different names for the two to keep them apart, I am well in favor of calling the latter "circles" much like Google did. That way people will know instantly what to expect.

mathias commented

2023-01-06 17:14:08 +00:00

Just as an FYI, if it is already known, sorry:

Regarding Lemmy, I tried to add a group (or "topic") from Lemmy (@privacy@lemmy.ml) as a contact, something that is possible in other fedi services. It didn't work on my Akkoma instance (which is my main instance). It worked straight away on my back-up instance which is running Friendica.

Just as an FYI, if it is already known, sorry: Regarding Lemmy, I tried to add a group (or "topic") from Lemmy (@privacy@lemmy.ml) as a contact, something that is possible in other fedi services. It didn't work on my Akkoma instance (which is my main instance). It worked straight away on my back-up instance which is running Friendica.

Kris commented

2023-06-06 09:57:55 +00:00

I tested Lemmy compatibility with the lastest stable release yesterday and it does work better now. You can follow communities now and top-level posts from Lemmy are shown as boosts on my Akkoma timeline. However it seems like none of the comments are federated and I did not yet try to comment from Akkoma.

amino commented

2023-06-15 06:50:34 +00:00

I tested Lemmy compatibility with the lastest stable release yesterday and it does work better now. You can follow communities now and top-level posts from Lemmy are shown as boosts on my Akkoma timeline. However it seems like none of the comments are federated and I did not yet try to comment from Akkoma.

I've been following a few groups from Lemmy and kbin and I prefer Akkoma's interface when browsing these groups. But I can't see replies to posts unless those replies are from users on not-lemmy/kbin (e.g. can't see replies from user accounts on lemmy but can see replies if a mastodon or Akkoma user made them)

> I tested Lemmy compatibility with the lastest stable release yesterday and it does work better now. You can follow communities now and top-level posts from Lemmy are shown as boosts on my Akkoma timeline. However it seems like none of the comments are federated and I did not yet try to comment from Akkoma. I've been following a few groups from Lemmy and kbin and I prefer Akkoma's interface when browsing these groups. But I can't see replies to posts unless those replies are from users on not-lemmy/kbin (e.g. can't see replies from user accounts on lemmy but can see replies if a mastodon or Akkoma user made them)

csolisr commented

2023-08-16 15:54:32 +00:00

I tested Lemmy compatibility with the lastest stable release yesterday and it does work better now. You can follow communities now and top-level posts from Lemmy are shown as boosts on my Akkoma timeline. However it seems like none of the comments are federated and I did not yet try to comment from Akkoma.

I'm using the latest stable version (3.10.3) and I'm following several communities on both Lemmy and Kbin. However, I've noticed a few major issues regarding how does the site handle them:

The transmogrifier constantly spams error messages when processing messages from either (especially from Lemmy), making the server log constantly increase its size
Potentially due to this, incoming items are not managed properly - both the initial posts and the comments are displayed at the same level, as reposts, in the home timeline, and that severely pollutes the latter. This might be fixable on our side using a MRF rule though (setting all replies to group messages to "unlisted" instead of "public").
Lists don't work properly either - adding a community to a list does not display any messages from the latter unless they've just been received from the server, which is to say, there's no backfilling for lists specifically.

> I tested Lemmy compatibility with the lastest stable release yesterday and it does work better now. You can follow communities now and top-level posts from Lemmy are shown as boosts on my Akkoma timeline. However it seems like none of the comments are federated and I did not yet try to comment from Akkoma. I'm using the latest stable version (3.10.3) and I'm following several communities on both Lemmy and Kbin. However, I've noticed a few major issues regarding how does the site handle them: - The transmogrifier constantly spams error messages when processing messages from either (especially from Lemmy), making the server log constantly increase its size - Potentially due to this, incoming items are not managed properly - both the initial posts and the comments are displayed at the same level, as reposts, in the home timeline, and that severely pollutes the latter. This might be fixable on our side using a MRF rule though (setting all replies to group messages to "unlisted" instead of "public"). - Lists don't work properly either - adding a community to a list does not display any messages from the latter unless they've just been received from the server, which is to say, there's no backfilling for lists specifically.

👍 1

amino commented

2023-08-20 10:54:00 +00:00

Pretty much the exact same experience I'm having.
I'm hoping there's some way to get this resolved either on the Akkoma or Kbin/Lemmy sides

Pretty much the exact same experience I'm having. I'm hoping there's some way to get this resolved either on the Akkoma or Kbin/Lemmy sides

[investigation] take a look at the viability of groups #20