Alright Ive added @kevincox@lemmy.ml, @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml and @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml as mods and removed the inactive ones.
Lemmy maintainer
Alright Ive added @kevincox@lemmy.ml, @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml and @Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml as mods and removed the inactive ones.
I just opened an issue about it: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/4744
This, particularly reports are not fully federated.
It was always normalized, but recently there seems to be more backlash from maintainers.
Sounds like there might be a bug in Lemmy then. Please open an issue in the Lemmy repo.
We have never rejected any patches from lemmy.world admins or from sublinks developers.
Well written, it would deserve a separate post.
Im a former contributor to F-Droid with various merged pull requests. Looking at the indicated pull request I really doubt that it was an intentional attack. First of all its easy to forget for a new developer to escape SQL parameters, and the docs dont even mention a risk of SQL injection attacks. And of the users pushing for the PR to be merged, one is a long-time F-Droid contributor, and the other also looks like a real human with many contributions in other repos, so no sockpuppets in sight.
It simply looks like standard open source behaviour, for better or for worse. A new user makes a contribution for a highly demanded feature, and users want it to get merged as soon as possible. Maintainers are discussing the big picture of the change and want to avoid breaking changes, without getting into code review yet. The new contributor seems unwilling to make any design changes to his PR, and gets frustrated that it doesnt get merged as is. The potential vulnerability is only noticed half a year after the PR was opened, at which point it was already de facto abandoned. So not an attack, but simply a developer who is new to open source and doesnt understand how the process works.
We applied for funding last August, but unfortunately we are still waiting for it to be finalized. Seems like NLnet is quite overloaded these days.
The Activitypub protocol is fine. It could use some minor improvements but there’s definitely no reason for an entirely new protocol.
We only do major versions around once a year so those could still be named, while using numbers for minor versions. Lemmy is more user-facing than react, so it would make sense to have a more user-friendly versioning.
I bet a year ago you would have said the exact same things about Lemmy, and yet here you are.
There are plenty of Wikipedia articles which are not objective, particularly when it comes to politics or history. Of course federation means there would be many different wikis. That makes sense, for example different countries should have their own independent wikis, instead of using one controlled by a different nation.
The more I think about it, the more I like the name. Here is the freshly renamed repo, but its not released yet so 🤫
It sounds like you didn’t read the article at all, because it clearly explains how Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales himself is involved in many such cases of corruption and manipulation. The code is not the problem, but the fact that a single organization has full control over the site and can decide which contributions get accepted or rejected.
Wikipedia has very major problems, but almost nobody is aware of them. Give this article a read to get an idea.
Yes the mascot is not mandatory, thats why I said bonus points. Fedipedia is too boring though, and too similar to Wikipedia.
I like this, although it feels a bit too short.
There were optimizations related to database triggers, these are probably responsible for the speedup.
https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/pull/4696