Still no documentation and not anywhere close to done, but my library is open source at

My goal is to provide a well-tested, flexible library that handles the complicated parts of ActivityPub (JSON-LD, persistence, addressing, etc.) in a way that can be plugged into an existing PHP codebase with no hassle. That'll help me refactor , and will also make it easy for other developers to make developers to make plugins for Joomla, Drupal, etc.

@jdormit Will it also support the #LitePub variant of #ActivityPub that one of the #Pleroma devs is creating?


Probably not - is LitePub supposed to be compatible with ActivityPub? I want to support the standard that other people will implement

@jdormit Yes, I believe LP is a slimmed down profile of AP. You'd probably have to ask Kaniini to be sure.

@lnxw37d2 Well, as long as it's compatible than apps built with my library will be able to federate with LitePub, I guess. I'm going to stick with the W3C spec on my end.

@jdormit @lnxw37d2 sticking to the w3c spec means not federating with anyone, though.
@jdormit @lnxw37d2 w3c spec doesn't include any signing mechanism or webfinger, both of which are needed to have any widespread federation

Yeah fair enough. My library will handle signing and verification but since webfinger has to implemented at the server level that'll have to be handled by callers

@jdormit which of the two non-mandated signing mechanisms will you do :) (httpsig, json-jd sigs)

@lain @jdormit @lnxw37d2 W3C spec doesn't solve the discovery problem, which is what webfinger solves. Sticking to the ActivityPub spec means you could federate with anyone, but no one knows how to find you.

@lain @cj @lnxw37d2 @jdormit I think it won't accept anything from servers and they'll fail with a validation thing if there's no webfinger, that's what I had when WF was broken

@vaartis @lain @jdormit @lnxw37d2 Can also confirm when testing with go-fed, Mastodon requires webfinger.

@Jeremy @Katherine M. Moss @cj 🇺🇸🇨🇭 @Suzanne tired her work all done @Mayel @🅕🅘🅝🅐🅛 🅱🅞🅢🅢

Litepub started as a long series of most unintelligible rants about killer drones and if you weren't following the Pleroma dev who ranted it, you missed out. (I wasn't, and by the time I was, he was ranting about other stuff but blamed me for sending the killer drones because I thought it would be nice to let people know when you updated your profile photo instead of just updating the photo for everybody on the network every day). Then a spec was started and it's mostly unintelligible rants about killer drones with links to non-existent additional pages. I'm going to give it a miss.

@mike Between the context of this message (Jeremy & Pterotype) and the content of this message (kaniini & LitePub), I am extremely confused.

@cj 🇺🇸🇨🇭 the question was raised if a general purpose ActivityPub library should support ActivityPub or litepub or both. My comment referred to my own attempts to research the differences and technical specifications in order to answer that very question.

@mike Ah I see. Whatever app you're using to reply to ActivityPub messages is not handling the inReplyTo well, so all your replies seem to be to the top level message. Sorry for the confusion.

@cj 🇺🇸🇨🇭 Osada is single threaded. The backend has support for multi-threading but needs a developer to work through the UX and theming before it can be turned on. I'm too busy with more important stuff atm.

@mike Ah I see, I understand. I hope Osada users don't get too confused if other fediverse folks have odd reactions due to this, because I had to suppress my "WTF" knee jerk reaction (since I wasn't involved in the LitePub branch of the thread).

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!