Improve collaboration within fediverse

Sat, 30 Jul 2022 14:55:49 +0200

adminsforum@hubzilla.org

citc schrieb den folgenden Beitrag Sat, 30 Jul 2022 14:55:46 +0200

Improve collaboration within fediverse

Why do free(dom) software programmers often choose to ignore other projects and try and replicate extant functionality?

Is it because of their poor inter-personal skills?

˗ˏˋ Doug Belshaw ˎˊ˗ ?☠️✊: (@dajbelshaw@fosstodon.org)

@bonfire@indieweb.social's latest trick shows Google+ circles came a decade early
https://dougbelshaw.com/blog/2022/07/30/bonfire-granular-boundaries/

Sat, 30 Jul 2022 19:42:38 +0200

Bill Statler

billstatler@forum.statler.ws

I've never heard of Bonfire, but it does look like they're trying to reinvent Hubzilla-style permissions. I'm looking at their "long list of verbs"...
https://github.com/bonfire-networks/bonfire-app/issues/406
...and my immediate reaction is: that is SO MANY permissions with so many subtle meanings, the resulting product will be impossible for anyone except Bonfire experts to use.

Sun, 31 Jul 2022 23:09:31 +0200

Jupiter Rowland

jupiter_rowland@hub.netzgemeinde.eu

They don't ignore other projects. They simply don't know these projects exist.

Or why do you think was #Diaspora developed, even though #Mistpark, now #Friendica, was more than ready for prime time, as was #StatusNet a.k.a. #GNUsocial?

Mon, 01 Aug 2022 16:18:36 +0200

Scott M. Stolz

scott@hubzilla.monster

I think the challenge is that sometimes there are competing visions and use cases, and that sometimes it is just easier to implement what you want yourself than convince the maintainers of a project that your idea is compatible with their vision.

For example, some people want a Twitter-like experience. Some want a Facebook-like experience. Some want a forum-like experience. Some want a hybrid approach. It's hard to get everyone on the same page when they can't agree on what the final project will look like.

It also depends on how easy it is to create mods, extensions, and add-ons for a project.

For example, I would like to create a hybrid interface that gives the best of social media and forum views, so you get the stream of new content instantly, and you also can easily view older posts in an organized manner. Multiple ways to view the same information.

But not all projects are easy to mod. For example, Mastodon officially has zero mods and if they have documents on how to create a mod, it is well hidden. They have an API and clients, but that is not the same as being able to create a mod. Hubzilla, on the other hand, is designed to be modded and I can easily change how Hubzilla operates without even changing the core code. So, Mastodon might be more popular, but I can't modify it to do what I want.

If Hubzilla wasn't so modifiable and didn't already have the core features I want, I would be forced to build something from scratch.

It's easy to chalk up the different visions as ego, but I think part of it is use cases. Someone who prefers a twitter-like experience will simply not be that interested in adding forum features they never plan on using. Their use case is different.

And that is okay. Competing platforms with different use cases is awesome. Not all email clients are the same, so why should the fediverse be the same.

I think the biggest focus needs to be on interoperability.

For example, email works regardless of what email client you have, and your ticket system can send and receive emails, and so can your CRM system. The platforms don't have to be the same if they can talk to one another.

I think that we are taking the right direction with ActivityPub and other initiatives, and that is probably where we should focus.