Skip Navigation

The playground schematic analogy for designing a fediverse service.

dbzer0.com The playground schematic analogy for designing a fediverse service.

In recent days, the discussion around Lemmy has become a bit...spicy. There's a few points of impact here. To list some examples: Beehaw being frustrated enough to ponder leaving the software Sublinks being started out of uncertainty with the lemmy roadmap Drama about inability to delete images and ...

The playground schematic analogy for designing a fediverse service.
40
40 comments
  • Its important to keep in mind that Lemmy is provided for free and as-is. It also hasnt reached version 1.0 yet so obviously there are still many features missing. Yet there are tens of thousands of users and hundreds of admins who are happy with Lemmy in its current state.

    To continue with the analogy, if the Lemmy playground is not safe enough for your particular neighborhood, you have a few different choices:

    • Wait for someone else to solve the problem (but this may take very long or forever)
    • Solve the problem yourself, or pay someone to do it
    • Use a different type of playground instead

    Beehaw in particular has $5,470 in donation balance. This would cover my income for around 2.5 months. They could easily take this money to hire a developer and implement the features they require. Yet they believe that they are somehow entitled to dictating what I or Dessalines should work on.

    Edit: This doesn't mean that I don't care about implementing better mod tools, in fact if you look at the pull requests there have been numerous improvements in this area. But resources are limited and mod tools cannot be the only priority as some people seem to expect.

    Edit 2: To be very clear, this comment is only aimed at Beehaw admins and a few other individuals who are extremely entitled and think they can dictate me to work on features they specifically want. The vast majority of users and admins on Lemmy are not like that, so of course my comment is not aimed at them and Im working hard every day to make Lemmy better for the majority. But that means I cant get distracted and waste time on features that only a tiny minority wants.

  • Lemmy's maintainers seem overworked. As is the case with so much of software dev, (open source or otherwise!) non-programmers are unaware of or underestimate maintenance burden. From the outside, it looks like it's just about "adding a feature". But in reality, it's less about "adding" and more about "growing". Feature requests generally need to be evaluated with this in mind; whether future development is sustainable with some new feature(s).

    I see opportunities here for some software dealing with either ActivityPub directly or with Lemmy's HTTP API.

    Anyone used lemmy-modder? Thoughts?

  • I had my phone read me the article since I was busy doing some manual task. I wholeheartedly agree. The development of a plugin (or modding for the gaming crowd) system would be massively beneficial for speeding up the development process.

    The current issue I have for example: I‘d like lemmy to have some features and I actually can fork it and do a PR if necessary but I dont know how to dockerize the whole thing again and this makes it insanely complicated. A plugin system would mean I can develop something without working on the original thing.

    It is what makes kodi gread, what makes long time favorite games great (minecraft, fallout for example) and those are proprietary, for profit games. Imagine the impact of this in the FOSS community. A LOT more people here know how to code and tinker which makes mods and plugins so much more likely to happen.

    Anyway, thank you again for providing the instance and your inconsiderable knowledge and ability to write concisely like this. If you ever write a book, I will definitely buy it. Have a good one!

40 comments