RFC: handling of third-party frontends in default available FE list #945

Merged

Oneric merged 3 commits from Oneric/akkoma:third-party-frontends into develop 2025-11-27 21:32:03 +00:00

Conversation 7 Commits 3 Files changed 7 +65 -2

Oneric commented 2025-06-29 10:46:50 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

This works and is low-friction for installs via mix tasks, but won’t show any indication when installing via admin-fe or via manually calling API with a pre-configured third-party frontend. (And I have no intention of patching admin-fe myself)
This PR includes the additon of pleroma’s pleroma-fe from #944 as an example.

More thorough and harder to miss would be if installing a third-party frontend required explicit acknowledgement in the form of a third-party flag being passed or so (which will definetly need an admin-fe patch though)

Yet another possibility, but with the most friction for installs, is to just never pre-configure third-party frontends in the default install, but at least make it easier for admins to manually add them. Atm if admins want to add a frontend to the default available list, they’ll need to copy the whole default list (or drop all default frontends). We could instead provide another, by default empty, list for third-party frontends and merge them at runtime.

Note, even now third-party frontends can already be installed and updated without needing any configuration by explicitly passing the build URL/file/dir; this is poosbile via both mix and admin-fe.

This works and is low-friction for installs via `mix` tasks, but won’t show any indication when installing via admin-fe or via manually calling API with a pre-configured third-party frontend. *(And I have no intention of patching admin-fe myself)* This PR includes the additon of pleroma’s pleroma-fe from #944 as an example. More thorough and harder to miss would be if installing a third-party frontend required explicit acknowledgement in the form of a `third-party` flag being passed or so *(which will definetly need an admin-fe patch though)* Yet another possibility, but with the most friction for installs, is to just never pre-configure third-party frontends in the default install, but at least make it easier for admins to manually add them. Atm if admins want to add a frontend to the default available list, they’ll need to copy the whole default list *(or drop all default frontends)*. We could instead provide another, by default empty, list for third-party frontends and merge them at runtime. Note, even now third-party frontends can already be installed and updated without needing any configuration by explicitly passing the build URL/file/dir; this is poosbile via both `mix` and admin-fe.

Oneric added 1 commit 2025-06-29 10:46:50 +00:00

frontend: mark functions without external users as private 7c8e7277cf

Oneric force-pushed third-party-frontends from bc457e1715 to fde9471529 2025-06-29 17:30:27 +00:00 Compare

HJ commented 2025-10-07 16:47:49 +00:00

First-time contributor

Copy link

any chance of this getting merged?

any chance of this getting merged?

HJ commented 2025-11-13 06:35:37 +00:00

First-time contributor

Copy link

ping since this is getting stale. i thought akkoma merges are supposed to be faster than pleroma's?

ping since this is getting stale. i thought akkoma merges are supposed to be faster than pleroma's?

floatingghost commented 2025-11-13 20:14:57 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

apologies, this ended up down on the list of priorities

i am unsure as to the value it brings, but it doesn't seem actively bad so it is what it is

fine by me

apologies, this ended up down on the list of priorities i am unsure as to the value it brings, but it doesn't seem actively bad so it is what it is fine by me

Oneric force-pushed third-party-frontends from fde9471529 to 8f237d5a63 2025-11-13 21:12:14 +00:00 Compare

Oneric force-pushed third-party-frontends from 8f237d5a63 to 847517e9a0 2025-11-14 12:51:35 +00:00 Compare

floatingghost commented 2025-11-22 17:06:28 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

in testing with updated admin-fe -> new properties should be exposed via the admin API view, as that's how we populate the list

in testing with updated admin-fe -> new properties should be exposed via the [admin API](https://akkoma.dev/AkkomaGang/akkoma/src/branch/develop/lib/pleroma/web/admin_api/views/frontend_view.ex) view, as that's how we populate the list

floatingghost commented 2025-11-22 17:19:26 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

assuming the above, admin-fe patch at AkkomaGang/admin-fe#28

assuming the above, admin-fe patch at https://akkoma.dev/AkkomaGang/admin-fe/pulls/28

Oneric force-pushed third-party-frontends from 847517e9a0 to 98a94ce080 2025-11-22 22:51:36 +00:00 Compare

Oneric commented 2025-11-22 22:53:19 +00:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

new properties should be exposed via the admin API view

added sth; does this look good? (also see comment on admin-fe PR)

> new properties should be exposed via the admin API view added sth; does this look good? (also see comment on admin-fe PR)

Oneric force-pushed third-party-frontends from 98a94ce080 to 29d4f1fd71 2025-11-22 23:22:16 +00:00 Compare

Oneric force-pushed third-party-frontends from 29d4f1fd71 to 798beec97b 2025-11-23 16:06:18 +00:00 Compare

floatingghost commented 2025-11-27 20:42:18 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

ayeaye captain, all looks ok to me

ayeaye captain, all looks ok to me

Oneric merged commit 70877306af into develop 2025-11-27 21:32:03 +00:00

Oneric deleted branch third-party-frontends 2025-11-27 21:32:03 +00:00

Oneric referenced this pull request from a commit 2025-11-27 21:32:04 +00:00

Merge pull request 'RFC: handling of third-party frontends in default available FE list' (#945) from Oneric/akkoma:third-party-frontends into develop

Oneric referenced this pull request 2025-11-27 21:34:34 +00:00

Add pleroma-fe to list of available frontends (in admin-fe) #944

Sign in to join this conversation.

Reviewers

No reviewers

Labels

Clear labels   

approved, awaiting change

  

bug

Something is not working

  

cannot reproduce

  

configuration

This requires config changes

  

documentation

This is about human-readable docs

  

duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  

enhancement

New feature

  

extremely low priority

  

feature request

Something new?

  

Fix it yourself

Support has been attempted

  

help wanted

Need some help

  

invalid

Something is wrong

  

mastodon_api

  

needs change/feedback

Issue or PR is stalled on response from the author or a third party

  

needs docs

  

needs tests

  

not a bug

  

not our bug

Bug in a dependency of ours (meaning we can't just fix it), or in another AP implementation or client interfacing with Akkoma (which needs to be fixed on their end)

  

planned

  

pleroma_api

  

privacy

  

question

More information is needed

  

static_fe

  

triage

  

wontfix

This won't be fixed

No labels

approved, awaiting change

bug

cannot reproduce

configuration

documentation

duplicate

enhancement

extremely low priority

feature request

Fix it yourself

help wanted

invalid

mastodon_api

needs change/feedback

needs docs

needs tests

not a bug

not our bug

planned

pleroma_api

privacy

question

static_fe

triage

wontfix

Milestone

Clear milestone

No items

No milestone

Projects

Clear projects

No items

No project

Assignees

Clear assignees

No assignees

3 participants

Notifications

Subscribe

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

AkkomaGang/akkoma!945

No description provided.