Implementing postingRestrictedToMods
Technical Discussion
6
Posts
3
Posters
20
Views
-
Hey pfefferle@mastodon.social nutomic@lemmy.ml, I'm looking to integrate support for
postingRestrictedToModsI see some discussion here:
It's a little specific, but even so, I'm happy to add it, since it solves some issues with cross-community content creation permission.
Is there a JSON-LD context I can add, since I am assuming that
postingRestrictedToModsis not standard? -
undefined nodebb@fosstodon.org shared this topic on
-
-
pfefferle@mastodon.social how has nobody complained about that yet? π
-
@julian π
-
Its part of the part of the Lemmy context so you could include that.
Btw I didnt notice your post before because Lemmy doesnt support mention notifications in that context yet (it will be in 1.0).
-
Its part of the part of the Lemmy context so you could include that.
Btw I didnt notice your post before because Lemmy doesnt support mention notifications in that context yet (it will be in 1.0).
Thanks! I will do just that... mostly since I don't feel like hosting my own context just for this one property.
This feature is now implemented and should ship with the next minor version of NodeBB β v4.8.0.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@silverpill @helge Alright, done:
-
@julian Yes, just open a PR. It will be merged by a facilitator, but only if the author approves. Here's how it looks like: https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/pulls/758
-
@silverpill @helge I couldn't find any explicit guidance for external contributions in FEP-a4ed. So the expected process would be to simply open a PR? Would that be merged by the respective FEP author or by a repository facilitator?
As you might know, I've been documenting FEP-044f implementations in Bridgy Fed's GitHub issue about that FEP, but I've been hesitant to dump reviewing/merging work on the sole author of FEP-044f just to βupstreamβ the information.
-
@julian The site was built by @helge, I also contribute to this project from time to time.
Yes, authors are responsible for maintaining implementation lists, but FEP process is meant to be collaborative and others can add missing implementations by opening a PR.
-
@silverpill Is that your work? Thanks!
Still, it makes me think even more that we should have some sort of software project Γ FEP matrix for implementation status info that's more easily editable by anyone (wiki-style?) and not solely reliant on the FEP authors keeping the implementation list up to date. Something like https://correct.webfinger-canary.fietkau.software/#implementation-status but collaborative.
-
FEP website now displays the number of implementations for each implementable proposal:
https://fediverse.codeberg.page/fep/final/
These numbers are based on the information that authors provide in the "Implementations" section of a proposal.
By default, proposals are informational, so authors need to opt in by adding type: implementation to the metadata block.
-
@mapache@hachyderm.io yes that's correct, Lemmy, Piefed, NodeBB, and Mbin.
-
@julian interesting! thanks for sharing. Is the threadiverse forums like nodebb or lemmy?
