#dev 2026-11-08

2026-11-08 UTC
JoshuaMorris and grufwub joined the channel
#
WinnerWind [pcarrier_com]: looks really cool! could it be put on dockerhub?
#
[pcarrier_com] It's a single static binary that depends on a DB I'm not sure I can redistribute. Will look into it :)
#
WinnerWind [pcarrier_com]: no worries! you can just tell the user to mount the database files
#
WinnerWind i don't run *anything* on my server without docker. safety reasons
JoshuaMorris, ruecharli and lain`_ joined the channel
#
WinnerWind so i was debugging a formula in my game and i came across this silly comment https://x0.at/kaDGTGzeQs.png
JoshuaMorris and bterry1 joined the channel
#
WinnerWind https://scastiel.dev/3dbook/ could be useful!
Pixi`, thatoddshade, barnaby, deathcomestotime, rMdes-bnc and bterry joined the channel
#
simpleauthority [snarfed], for later, I recently syndicated a reply post to bluesky via bridgy and noticed that it failed to process. The error received from bridgy end was something about "this doesn't look like Bluesky/AT-proto". I think it's because the in-reply-to URL for bluesky is expected to be a bluesky or AT-proto link. Is this documented somewhere? I wasn't aware of it. FWIW, same post going to mastodon via bridgy work
troojg, ax562 and [snarfed] joined the channel
#
[snarfed] simpleauthority this is Bridgy classic, not Fed? yeah it doesn’t currently support publishing a non-Bluesky reply to Bluesky, but we allow(ed) that for Twitter and Mastodon, we should maybe allow it for Bluesky too. https://github.com/snarfed/bridgy/issues/1321#issuecomment-1281676917
#
Loqi [preview] [snarfed] > I was under the impression that native web posts were common `u-in-reply-to` WebMention targets. Yes! This is asolutely true. But... > I thought that Bridgy was able to support posting the reply as an entirely new post in the silo if it was n...
barnaby, trwnh, troojg and rubenwardy joined the channel
#
GWG I've been doing bug and testing fixes for Syndication Links and it's had me thinking about how to improve POSSE.