Andy's latest activity

{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}

@Gargron Mastodon computer confirmed

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}

@dansup I have a question about a possible backend refactor I wanted to do for Pixelfed.

I noticed all API code is inside a single file per API version, wouldn't it be cleaner to have a version namespace and API controllers for each feature?

Before attempting this I thought I'd ask you if you even want such a change because the controller has been growing since I first saw it! 🙂

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}

@Gargron @thebiologist837 @hobs @rickrau @mdyshel This sounds like a mishap and confusion with mastodon.technology (the admin of which mentioned a family member falling terminally in in their shutdown announcement)

ashfurrow.com/blog/mastodon-te

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

Is it just me or is blocking on Loops broken right now?

1
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup If someone wants to redo what your camera does, they will eventually find a way regardless of you open sourcing it or not!

publishing different builds to what your open source code is has multiple drawbacks:

* no replicable builds: we as a community never can be sure what you push to the store
* the release process gets over-complicated for you too, because you need to bring in the different camera into the OSS code locally for each release

1
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup I assume this has to do with the plans of offering hosting for Pixelfed, and ease of configuring when no server access is given

but stuff like this should be handled in a hosting panel outside of the main app then.

adding so much logic into the application to keep those values safe, when easier options are already there is a bit...counter-productive. and error-prone as well, and you don't want these secrets to get into the wrong hands!

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup you should have stopped after the first line.

just having storage credentials in ENV is enough, they never really need to be in the database.

1
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup @pixelfed it's not about UI updates

people hate change

UI is just the quickest they notice usually

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup Misskeys codebase is feature-rich (or bloated, rather) and everyone has a different idea of how to improve it.

if people don't like the direction a fork is taking development-wise, they either fork Misskey, or that fork, and then make their own set of changes.

1
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup @pixelfed

Make the default a browser for trusted instances, but give users the option to specify the URL of an instance as "advanced feature".

This way everyone should be happy.

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin

@dansup @pixelfed even more of a reason to appear there and show people that you managed to build it in PHP even, which so many people consider unfit for whatever reason.

PHP hate in 2023 is unreasonable, because people still think of it from the 5.4 days.

0
Share
Share on Mastodon
Share on Twitter
Share on Facebook
Share on Linkedin
Replies