Server announcements #44
Labels
No labels
approved, awaiting change
bug
configuration
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
extremely low priority
feature request
Fix it yourself
help wanted
invalid
mastodon_api
needs docs
needs tests
not a bug
planned
pleroma_api
privacy
question
static_fe
triage
wontfix
No milestone
No project
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: AkkomaGang/akkoma#44
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
There seems to have been a recent MR that was merged in upstream Pleroma regarding server announcements: https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma/-/merge_requests/3643
And a corresponding MR for Pleroma-Fe that hasn't been merged yet: https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma-fe/-/merge_requests/1466
This I recall has been something Pleroma instance admins have been wanting for a while now. Mastodon and Misskey both have this sort of feature for a while now.
the Mastodon announcements also have support for reactions, including custom reactions, but they're handled differently to how misskey and akkoma do it
it's an attribute of an announcement instead of a Like activity
if we aim for mastoapi compatibility we'd have to implement custom customs emoji in two different ways which sounds clunky
i hate activitypub
afaik announcements are local only so I don't think it really has much to do with ActivityPub itself unless I'm getting things wrong
still, AP or not, in order to make it work with apps and frontends that use mastodon it needs to work like this
doing some poking around on this
was very easy to merge in the changes, but luckily it's not a like activitity, since these don't federate - it's internal only
it doesn't work precisely like i'd hope it would so i need to add a poller of some description but otherwise it should be ok
pass 1 commits merged, that all works as you'd expect
Looks like it's implemented in
fab72940c4
and54ed8760ff
Thanks!