@
Strypey So Pleroma and Akkoma (which, for some reason, is missing from the list) actually use the ActivityPub C2S API to connect their frontends? Even though Pleroma predates ActivityPub and started out as an alternative GNU social frontend, much like Mastodon?
I mean, they're famous for having separate repositories for the server and the Web frontend (same name with "-FE" attached). And they're equally famous for having servers that forgo the official frontend in favour of third-party stuff, most notably Mangane.
So if Mangane actually makes use of that API rather than a homebrew *oma client API, it could be used as or, if need be, modified into a sparrings partner for API-testing purposes, not to mention that it's living proof that the API actually works. As it integrates with Pleroma and Akkoma that well, I've got my doubts that it only uses the Mastodon client API.
In the cases of (streams) and Forte which are almost the same software save for protocol support, the Web UI is much closer to the server backend, as flexible and modifyable it is. In their cases, the question would be whether they could be used to test just how far feature support in the ActivityPub C2S API can possibly go, maybe even whether it'd be possible to use the ActivityPub C2S API to build an almost fully-featured (streams)/Forte client app (except, of course, Web UI configuration and (streams)' per-channel ActivityPub switch which might cut the whole app off the server).
CC: @
Tim Chambers @
rakoo#
Long #
LongPost #
CWLong #
CWLongPost #
FediMeta #
FediverseMeta #
CWFediMeta #
CWFediverseMeta #
Fediverse #
ActivityPub #
Pleroma #
PleromaFE #
Akkoma #
AkkomaFE #
Mangane #
Akkomane #
Streams #
(streams) #
Forte #
API
@
@