From bd640a70994458409665e8ec0be89387a7fbe7a3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michael Jerger Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 09:21:23 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] add some pros to the source field --- docs/unsure-where-to-put/adr_star_activity.md | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/unsure-where-to-put/adr_star_activity.md b/docs/unsure-where-to-put/adr_star_activity.md index 07af33ea8e..4b8954eb90 100644 --- a/docs/unsure-where-to-put/adr_star_activity.md +++ b/docs/unsure-where-to-put/adr_star_activity.md @@ -21,11 +21,15 @@ This way of expressing stars will have the following features: -1. !ctor & object may be dereferenced by (ap-)api +1. Actor & object may be dereferenced by (ap-)api 2. The activity can be referenced itself (e.g. in order to express a result of the triggered action) 3. Star is a special case of a Like. Star only happens in ForgeFed context. Different things should be named differnt ... 4. With the `source` given it would be more easy to distinguish the uri layout for object and actor id's and make implementation more straight forward + 1. The `source` field reflects the software sending an activity. Values of may be forgejo, gitlab, ... + 2. Knowing the sending system will it make easier to interact with: + 1. We know exactly how the actor can be derefernced (see: https://codeberg.org/meissa/forgejo/src/commit/7cac9806f8247963b1cdce3f2c5f5d1bc3763fbe/models/forgefed/actor.go#L121) + 2. We know how we can validate the given references (see: https://codeberg.org/meissa/forgejo/src/commit/7cac9806f8247963b1cdce3f2c5f5d1bc3763fbe/routers/api/v1/activitypub/repository.go#L180) See also: -1. spec in clojure: https://repo.prod.meissa.de/meissa/activity-pub-poc/src/branch/forgefed_star/src/test/cljc/org/domaindrivenarchitecture/fed_poc/forgefed_test.cljc#L36-L41 +1. [spec in clojure]: https://repo.prod.meissa.de/meissa/activity-pub-poc/src/branch/forgefed_star/src/test/cljc/org/domaindrivenarchitecture/fed_poc/forgefed_test.cljc#L36-L41