Conversation:
Notices
-
@rtsn Go to http://sn.jonkman.ca/group/coffee, click on "Subscribe" and then enter https://gnusocial.de/rtsn -- that gets me the login screen on your server. Don't know why the @ address doesn't work, tho...
-
Looks like your post addressed the !Coffee group at http://sn.jonkman.ca/group/coffee To ensure your messages go to the correct group, you need to unsubscribe from all the other !Coffee groups
-
@bobjonkman "all the other !coffee groups"?? how many are there?!
-
@mk I see a total of five !Coffee groups: http://sn.jonkman.ca/search/group?q=coffee By "correct group" I mean the one you *want* to send messages to. The only way to ensure that is to unsubscribe from any other groups with the same name.
-
@rtsn What page is displayed when you see that error message? The !Coffee group has a successful subscription from @vinzv@gnusocial.de so our servers have communicated successfully in the past. Sadly, I have logging turned off because it used to fill log files at the rate of about 20 kBytes/s...
-
And I see that your server sees *six* different \!Coffee groups: http://oracle.skilledtests.com/search/group?q=coffee of which we have only four in common: on vinilox, oracle, status.fsf.org, and sn.jonkman.ca; sn.jonkman.ca sees one on loadaverage, and oracle sees one on identi.ca and quitter.se. So that's *seven* !Coffee groups now...
-
@bobjonkman what I really want is only *one* group for !coffee (or anyting, really). I think it needs to be easier to "discover" already-existing groups, so people would be less likely to create 'duplicates'. OR there might be a mechanism by which groups exchange their content automatically.
-
@mk Yes, I really do think that the function of a group should be federated. If I start !NewGroup and there are already other !NewGroup instances defined on other servers then my !NewGroup should participate in sending messages to subscribers in all instances of !NewGroup. That provides some resilience too - if one !NewGroup disappears then the other !NewGroup instances can divide…
-
@bobjonkman Why should groups work like that while accounts don't?
Technically I don't see it happening because it won't work with how the web works. You'd have no guarantee whatsoever that the group you're following actually has all posts because all instances "sharing" it could have different policies.
What should be done is rather to make it clearer that it's !newgroup@example.com rather than just !newgroup.
-
@bobjonkman What would "solve" this is to have a verifiable "moved" verb that informs subscribers that there is a new home for the group. Right now that's handled manually - or should I say: socially ;)
-
@mmn I'd be happier with full group federation, but I'll settle for fully-qualified group names. Group federation should exist because it's a mechanism for addressing multiple recipients, similar to the way a !GNUsocial instance is a way to host multiple participants.
-
@mmn I don't understand why messages addressed to one group won't propagate to all instances of that group (although I understand that full propagation might not be guaranteed). But right now when I send a message it does reach all my subscribers, so there exists a mechanism for mass propagation. What needs to be developed is a way for multiple group instances to exchange subscriber lists.
-
@bobjonkman Worked like a charm, thanks a bunch! Will celebrate with !coffee :)
Former Bob Jonkman -- Please use the new server at https://gs.jonkman.ca
Temporary Marjolein
MMN-o ✅⃠
rtsn
All Hacker Poesy content and data are available under the