Presentation of the feature: https://piefed.social/post/667045
Example of successful migration: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45876492
Our next step would be to give this feature a try. What would basically happen is that
- we would lock our community to prevent integrity issue during the migration
- https://piefed.social/c/fedigrow@lemm.ee would become https://piefed.social/c/fedigrow , with all the existing posts and comments
- you all would subscribe to the new !fedigrow@piefed.social , and then continue as usual
Should the migration not work, we would still be able to use the current community, and then manually migrate elsewhere.
The one caveat is that from Lemmy instances, the community doesn’t have show old posts (see https://lemm.ee/c/barcelona@piefed.social), but if you were restarting a community from scratch you wouldn’t have access to your old posts anyway.
Other federated instances like feddit.online would also see the posts and comments on the new community: https://feddit.online/c/barcelona@piefed.social
The objective of this post is to address any questions or issues before we move forward. We are probably going to leave it open for 48 hours, and then reassess based on the community feedback.
Not that I know of, is that a deal breaker for you?
I guess we can try working something out if we would indeed migrate.
Would you prefer to use https://feddit.online/ ?
It’s just a terrible practice. How do users ensure that an instance is running the latest security patch?
While I’m happy to move, I’m not happy to have software falsify my actions and I in no way consent to it doing so.
You know me, I like to spread the load.
I had a quick look, seems like current versioning is handled by docker images, without proper versioning indeed: https://codeberg.org/rimu/pyfedi/src/branch/main/INSTALL-docker.md
Hopefully that will be solved down the line.
Noted. I might migrate !casualconversation@lemm.ee using that feature, do you have any comments or posts there we should remove?
I guess at some point I’ll probably use another instance too. Feddit.fr is tempting, but they aren’t using the latest version (I know because the title completion feature is missing). Hence my question on the Piefed Matrix chat on how updates are handled.
I don’t. You’re all good there.
Thank you for confirming!
There is no falsification if implemented correctly. Every comment and post that you submit is an activity. All that the “community migration” should be doing is to take these activities and re-
Announcethem, so it should look like a repost on Lemmy.If the migration feature however takes the content from the imported community and creates new activities out of the comments, then yes, it will be shady.
It’s falsification and not a slippery slope I want to go down. I only post to communities I want to and I do that explicitly. I do not authorise the pretense that I posted anywhere other than I actually did.
Just to clarify: what would you say if someone followed your Lemmy account from mastodon and Boosted (Retweeted) all of your posts and comments?
Retooting isn’t the same
Excuse my pedantry, but from the point of view of ActivityPub, it is.
Any remote instance sees your posts to any community as a
as:Announceactivity. All that the community is doing is boosting your comments/posts, and that can be done by anyone else.Ok, I watch the video with presenting the feature. @rimu@piefed.social, what is the AP representation of posts?
All the posts are reassigned to the local piefed community. From the perspective of remote instances, PieFed just got a new community with a whole lot of content in it.
I just checked one post from lemm.ee that was migrated to piefed. You are keeping two different objects with the same id, but altering the content to change the audience. I’d have to agree with @sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al, that would definitely qualify as falsification.
Thank you for your magnimity
What about “as:audience” attributes from the original “Create(Page)” activities? Does this mean that you are completely rewriting history?