• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
Cake day: March 24th, 2024
  • Nothing4You@programming.devtoLemmy@lemmy.ml•Automate posting to Lemmy through no-code toolsEnglish
    1·
    15 days ago

    I’m not familiar with n8n but it’s fairly straightforward on the API side.

    You’ll need a session token, also known as JWT, which you can get from logging in.

    You typically don’t want to do a login for every post, so you’ll want to store that as a persistent value.
    For authentication, you can pass the header authorization: Bearer {jwt}, with {jwt} being the session token.

    https://join-lemmy.org/api/classes/LemmyHttp.html contains the API documentation.

    You’ll need to figure out the id of the community that you want to post to.

    If you need to look it up, you can use getCommunity to fetch its details. Afterwards you can use createPost to submit it.

    The form links for the methods explain the request body json values that should be provided.

  • Nothing4You@programming.devtoAsklemmy@lemmy.ml•Why can't lemmy mods or admins clean up dead communities like askhistorians and others? I know they have a hard job and everything but we need an active user base to make lemmy to thrive.?English
    9·
    3 months ago

    cleaning up dead communities isn’t a great experience as it is today.

    admins could purge communities, but this can cause unexpected breakages with other activitypub software that is more strict about cryptographic verification, as purging a community erases all information about it from the local instance, including the cryptographic private key. purging a community also only removes it on the local instance, so other instances would still have a cached (although possibly marked as deleted) copy of it. this would be the only method that frees up the name to allow creating a new community under the same name later on. locally this would also remove all posts and comments associated in that community, but other instances may think that they have users subscribed to the community and may still have posts and comments in there. this also means if a new community is created with the same name again, the local instance will still not know about older posts, but users on other instances might see them still, and the local moderator might be unable to interact with them at all, e.g. to potentially remove old problematic content.

    the next option is removing a community as (instance-)moderator action. this will only mark the community as removed without further impact. regular users won’t be able to access the community on the local or any other instance anymore, but its contents are preserved in case it gets restored at a later point in time. the name is not released and there isn’t even an error message shown when trying to create a new community with the same name.

    another option could be to “take over” the community and delete it, which is the act of the top community mod deleting the community (not a moderation action). in this case only the same top community moderator can restore it. this behaves mostly the same as removing it.

    none of these options are good to use. imo purging should be avoided in any case, and the other options both require admin intervention to release a community later on and have no user feedback in lemmy-ui at this time, at least on 0.19.5.

    for communities entirely without posts it is probably ok to just remove them and restore and transfer them if someone requests them. for communities with content the next best thing might be locking the community, potentially locking all posts if it’s just a small number, to prevent unmoderated new content in that community, and put up a pinned post asking people to reach out if they want to take over the community. otherwise, if the community was removed or deleted, all the posts and comments within them would also be taken down with the community.

  • Nothing4You@programming.devtoLemmy@lemmy.ml•*Permanently Deleted*English
    6·
    3 months ago

    simply put: no

    most fediverse software has its own API specific to how that application works. in some cases different fediverse software may be sharing a common API, which is typically a result of either a reimplementation (e.g. the Sublinks project is working on a reimplementation of the Lemmy API) or the result of a fork, where the previous API has been inherited and is typically built on top of.

    It should also be noted that while Lemmy and Mastodon both use ActivityPub federation for interoperation, they have significantly different internal structures for how data is stored and represented to clients. I don’t know if mastodon supports vote federation with Lemmy at this point, but if it doesn’t do that currently, then using an alternative frontend won’t help you. It would likely be possible to build a Mastodon client that has a better thread view though, but it’d still have to be something built for the Mastodon API specifically.

  • Nothing4You@programming.devtoFediverse@lemmy.world•I think thread deletion is problematic and needs some consideration and changesEnglish
    7·
    4 months ago

    Except it wasn’t created on lemmy.ml, it was created on lemmy.world.

    lemmy.world then informed lemmy.ml that it is intended to be published in the community that it was created for.

    It doesn’t say “crossposted from lemmy.world” but “crossposted from canonical_post_url”. This is not wrong in any way, although it might be a bit confusing and could likely be improved by including a reference to the community. The instance domain should for the most part just be a technical detail there.

    It should also be noted that this format of crossposting is an implementation detail of Lemmy-UI and other clients may handle it differently (if they’re implementing crossposting in the first place).

  • Nothing4You@programming.devtoFediverse@lemmy.world•I think thread deletion is problematic and needs some consideration and changesEnglish
    2·
    4 months ago

    I’m not saying it’s technically impossible, although it would likely be a bit challenging to integrate on the technical level, as the community instance has no authority to modify the post itself other than removing it from the community at this point.

    The existing fedilink is already present for technical reasons anyway, so this is currently only showing existing data.

    Why would you want a lemmy.ml link though? On Lemmy you’re typically intending to stay on your own instance, which many third party apps already implement. For Lemmy UI there is already a feature request to implement this, although it might still take some time to get done. If you have the canonical link to an object (which will always point to the users instance) Lemmy can look up which post/comment you’re referring to in its db without any network calls when it already knows about the entry. If you were linking to the lemmy.ml version of that post then the instance would first have to do a network request to resolve that and then it would realize it’s actually the lemmy.world version that it may or may not know about already.

  • Nothing4You@programming.devtoFediverse@lemmy.world•I think thread deletion is problematic and needs some consideration and changesEnglish
    3·
    4 months ago

    it doesn’t matter whether you consider it reasonable, as it’s this way for technical reasons.

    when a post or comment are created they are created on the users instance. the users instance then tells the community instance about the new post/comment and the community instance relays (announces) this to other instances that have community subscribers.

    the fedilink is an id and reference to the original item. this unique id is known to all servers that know about this comment and it is what is used when updates to the post are distributed. except for the reference to the item on the originating instance, no instance stores information about where to find a specific post/comment on a random other instance.