question for the [#lemmy](https://universeodon.com/tags/lemmy) users and [#activitypub](https://universeodon.com/tags/activitypub) developers out there:
question for the #lemmy users and #activitypub developers out there:
now that @lemmy is seeing a spike in interest, and @Gargron has said he's interested in building out groups on #mastodon - this seems like the right time to update ActivityPub protocol to support groups natively. anyone looking into this?
lemmy's integration into mastodon is pretty janky right now and can be a lot better!
Here's the standard, FEP-1b12: Group federation -- finalized in February.
@jdp23 will take a read through this, thanks!
I think it's also compatible with Friendica groups, and forums like Discourse are testing out federation as well, so there's certainly potential. @[email protected] calls it "the threadiverse", I wasn't sure about the term at first but it's growing on me
@jessel @lemmy @Gargron Groups have multiple meanings tho...
"groups" as in.. a.gup.pe - people post into the group account, and it boosts for everybody following the group account to see on the main timeline like any other account.
groups as in - private group chats - a bunch of people posting to each other (not searchable/not public)
groups as in subreddits.. you subscribe to the group, and you can toot into that group... these toots are inside the group but fully interactive inside the group.
I'd appreciate it if you keep your toots in a private group.
@shlee @lemmy @Gargron yeah i was thinking about the last one
I can’t point you to the details, but yes things have been worked in at the protocol level for groups. It got finalised sometime this year.
I don’t know whether any future work will be compliant with it though.
@jessel @lemmy @Gargron
Lack of [private] groups are one of the things keeping me from spinning up an instance, because the people I'd like to prise away from FB need that.
I know there are options, but the clearest way to having a backup admin is a managed service.
Local-only posts would be spiffy too, but groups should push the bar far enough
@olavf @lemmy @Gargron +1 to private and secret groups. super important to have as there are topics that aren’t appropriate to be discussed publicly so i’m hoping the protocol supports it soon if not already
@jessel what does "support groups natively" mean to you ?
There are Group objects in the ActivityPub vocabulary already.
Posting to a group is already covered by well trodden interactions.
With a little charity with regards to the interpretation of some other vocabulary activities we can say that joining/leaving a group are also there.
What more do you think is needed?
@mariusor i guess help me understand how we, as mastodon users, can browse and interact with lemmy content without having to use their UI or account?
if i follow @lemmy on mastodon, it seems to be a feed of unstructured replies and comments that don’t have logical cohesion. is that because they are not using the Group objects in ActivityPub? and/or the Mastodon client doesn’t support Groups natively?