IRC log of social on 2018-03-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:04:26 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #social
15:04:26 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/03/28-social-irc
15:05:09 [fr33domlover]
aaronpk, is the audio written into the minutes as text? or should I make notes if I need?
15:05:22 [aaronpk]
trackbot, start meeting
15:05:22 [trackbot]
Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
15:05:24 [aaronpk]
oops
15:05:29 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: that's what the scribe is for
15:05:33 [aaronpk]
we will need to pick a scribe to scribe the call
15:05:58 [ajordan]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG#Scribing
15:06:30 [fr33domlover]
thanks ajordan i saw that, just wanted to be sure it's happening in this meeting too :)
15:06:53 [aaronpk]
ajordan: are you still connecting? guess we can get started once you do
15:07:04 [aaronpk]
I know a few others will be joining late in about 25 minutes
15:08:00 [fr33domlover]
I can scribe, but I type slowly and english isn't my native language :p
15:08:31 [fr33domlover]
(That's why I never scribed before on meetings of this sort :p)
15:09:07 [ajordan]
aaronpk: I just connected, did you hear me?
15:09:51 [aaronpk]
no, double check mic settings?
15:09:57 [ajordan]
oh man I forgot to disable the thing that announces everything
15:09:59 [ajordan]
what a nightmare
15:10:01 [ajordan]
just a sec
15:10:08 [ajordan]
you can start without me
15:10:32 [melody]
i can't hear anyone talking for some reason
15:11:19 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: probably you want to wait a bit until you recognize everyone's voices
15:11:54 [eprodrom]
eprodrom has joined #social
15:12:00 [eprodrom]
Halloo all
15:12:07 [ajordan]
aaronpk: you're clear
15:12:13 [eprodrom]
Weird
15:12:59 [ajordan]
I think I fixed my microphone, could y'all hear me?
15:13:09 [ajordan]
grr
15:14:22 [ajordan]
scribenick: ajordan
15:14:57 [ajordan]
eprodrom: hi yeah my name's Evan Prodromou, I'm one of the coauthors of the AS2 spec and also one of the contributors to pump.io, a distributed social networking project
15:15:10 [ajordan]
aaronpk: awesome thanks, I think we should just jump right in
15:15:22 [ajordan]
... I see fr33domlover had a question about federation for project hosting using AP
15:15:34 [ajordan]
... I don't know much about that other than that sentence
15:15:49 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: I started working ~3 years ago on a repository hosting, sort of like GitLab
15:15:54 [ajordan]
... I want to make it decentralized
15:16:12 [eprodrom]
q+
15:16:13 [ajordan]
... so I was thinking about how to match objects I have like users, repos etc. to objects in AP
15:16:25 [ajordan]
... so e.g. a question I have is what things should be actors
15:16:42 [ajordan]
... suppose the users are actors, should the project be an actor or an issue be an actor or a repo be an actor
15:16:42 [aaronpk]
ack eprodrom
15:17:00 [aaronpk]
scribenick: aaronpk
15:17:27 [aaronpk]
eprodrom: users can definitely be actors. issues probably don't need to be followed int he same way, but users and projects would make sense to be actors.
15:17:44 [aaronpk]
eprodrom: ultimately deciding what should be an actor in activitypub network is a question of "should I be able to follow this thing"
15:18:09 [aaronpk]
eprodrom: I have a question... have you thought about sketching out on the w3c wiki a diagram for this to get commetns and feedback?
15:18:17 [aaronpk]
scribenick: ajordan
15:18:19 [ajordan]
scribenick: ajordan
15:19:23 [eprodrom]
q-
15:19:45 [aaronpk]
ajordan: everyone is talking
15:19:53 [aaronpk]
mumble fail today
15:20:02 [ajordan]
ah sorry my headphones came out of the jack
15:20:04 [aaronpk]
haha
15:20:11 [ajordan]
if y'all can repeat real quick :/
15:20:13 [Loqi]
rofl
15:20:56 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: I can make a diagram, and I'd love to get a review on the diagram
15:21:09 [ajordan]
... if I want people to be able to follow an issue, e.g. in Bugzilla where there's a list of emails per issues
15:21:17 [ajordan]
... should I make issues into actors so people can follow them
15:21:27 [ajordan]
eprodrom: good question, I guess it comes down to what your use cases are
15:21:33 [ajordan]
... I see the point either way
15:21:42 [ajordan]
<ajordan> is it problematic to follow non-actor objects?
15:22:02 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: I had an idea about inbox and outbox, I'd like to see if it makes sense
15:22:12 [ajordan]
eprodrom: super sorry to do this, but I have to go soon and I have an item on the agenda
15:22:19 [ajordan]
... can I ask CG about next steps for this one thing?
15:22:23 [ajordan]
aaronpk: yeah go ahead
15:22:31 [ajordan]
eprodrom: so sorry, I don't like hijacking the agenda like this
15:22:46 [ajordan]
... so good news is that ajordan and I met over the weekend along with cwebber and we hacked on AP in pump.io
15:23:01 [ajordan]
... so we have some of the endpoints working as well as generating AS2 from our database
15:23:20 [ajordan]
... as I was looking at our code I realized there's a couple AP props that haven't been added to the context
15:23:33 [ajordan]
... I *think* that requires sandro or rhiaro to actually do the push to the W3C servers though
15:23:36 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/465
15:23:36 [Loqi]
[evanp] #465 Add "shares" from ActivityPub
15:23:43 [ajordan]
aaronpk: I belive that's correct, not sure who else would have access to that
15:23:45 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/464
15:23:45 [Loqi]
[evanp] #464 Add "likes" from ActivityPub to context
15:24:07 [ajordan]
eprodrom: so I think probably next steps is, I would do this in our GitHub repo and then I'll collaborate with sandro and rhiaro to get it pushed to W3C servers
15:24:24 [ajordan]
aaronpk: sorry is this basically a bug with the current context? AP says it should be a thing but it's not in the context?
15:24:27 [ajordan]
eprodrom: correct
15:24:36 [ajordan]
aaronpk: interesting, sounds like GitHub issues are a good place to track that
15:25:07 [ajordan]
eprodrom: the one thing is, I'd like to make sure we do as many of these as possible at once, so I'm gonna do a last pass over AP, add them to the context and ask sandro/rhiaro to do the push
15:25:09 [ajordan]
aaronpk: sounds good
15:25:17 [ajordan]
eprodrom: do we need to do a vote to approve that process?
15:25:32 [ajordan]
aaronpk: I don't think we need to do a vote? we could to document that that's the process we're following
15:25:42 [ajordan]
... and people here can provide feedback, as to whether that's a good idea
15:26:03 [ajordan]
aaronpk: anyone have thoughts about that? sounds like this is essentially a bugfix so I'm inclined to just let the editors roll with it since it's not creating anything new
15:26:07 [ajordan]
... seems very reasonable to me
15:26:09 [ajordan]
<ajordan> +1
15:26:29 [aaronpk]
+1
15:26:31 [eprodrom]
PROPOSAL: add shares, likes, and potentially other properties from ActivityPub to ActivityStreams 2.0 context
15:26:33 [eprodrom]
+1
15:26:36 [eprodrom]
Cool!
15:26:37 [aaronpk]
+1
15:26:51 [ajordan]
aaronpk: okay well if anyone else... oh there we go an actual proposal to vote on sure
15:26:54 [ajordan]
+1
15:27:04 [melody]
+1
15:27:12 [ajordan]
eprodrom: okay so if we're okay with it I'm going to take the steps and coordinate with sandro to get it pushed
15:27:23 [ajordan]
aaronpk: sounds good and can your report back to IRC as to how that goes?
15:27:41 [ajordan]
eprodrom: okay I have to run, I appreciate it and especially fr33domlover I appreciate you letting me agenda jump, I know that's a hassle
15:27:48 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: it's okay
15:27:50 [ajordan]
aaronpk: thanks evan
15:27:55 [eprodrom]
Outie
15:28:15 [ajordan]
aaronpk: before we go back to fr33domlover's questions, does anything else have anythign to talk about? otherwise I think we should just go back to the original questions
15:29:15 [ajordan]
aaronpk: okay so back to your arcitecture questions
15:29:30 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: okay so because I'm doing this for project hosting I have lots of objects and concepts that are extensions to plain AP
15:29:55 [ajordan]
so my question is if I have things like new actor types, it won't just be like group, person, service, it'll be like issue, repo
15:30:14 [ajordan]
... so if I have all these extra properties, does it make it harder for my app to federate with existing implementations
15:30:20 [ajordan]
... like e.g. pump.io once they have AP
15:30:48 [ajordan]
... so could someone on pump.io comment on an issue or whatever despite pump.io not understanding the extensions
15:30:56 [ajordan]
... do I need to be careful about stuff to make sure I'm still compatible
15:31:04 [aaronpk]
scribenick: aaronpk
15:31:15 [aaronpk]
ajordan: let me think about it for a minute
15:32:02 [aaronpk]
... citation needed, but I think pump.io should accept anything it doesn't recognize, so as long as you provide some sort of sensible alternative content, like a fallback description in summary, then it should display
15:32:07 [aaronpk]
... and you can certainly add comments to that
15:32:38 [aaronpk]
... it might not show up in the pump web UI or clients, i'm not sure, but you could use a pump account. like if you had a client that displayed issues you could use your pump account
15:32:58 [aaronpk]
... you would need to write your own JSON-LD context so other implementations can understand that
15:33:08 [aaronpk]
... pump.io probably wont end up caring about that, but other implementations do
15:33:24 [aaronpk]
fr33domlover: great i'll end up doing that
15:33:53 [aaronpk]
... the spec says you can treat the data as plain JSON, so do implementations usualyl understand JSON-LD? would that be a problem? or can I trust them to accept what they don't understand
15:34:23 [aaronpk]
ajordan: the answer is complicated. in the spec, all the authorization stuff is unspecified. in real life... let me find the wiki url
15:34:31 [ajordan]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/ActivityPub/Authentication_Authorizationhttps://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/ActivityPub/Authentication_Authorization
15:35:19 [aaronpk]
... what has happened in real life is all of the implementations have converged on this authentication scheme where server-to-server people use HTTP signatures and linked data signatures, so all implementations are full JSON-LD processing or they have a corner where they care about LD and the rest they treat it as plain JSON
15:35:31 [aaronpk]
... mastodon does it as mostly plain JSON, pump will do it as plain JSON
15:35:38 [aaronpk]
... kroeg will do json-ld, not sure about the others
15:35:47 [aaronpk]
fr33domlover: so either way I need JSON-LD for the things you linked
15:35:50 [saranix]
hmm... I suppose the same applies to my chat presense question... so if someone is "following" the room actor, they will get objects like { summary:"@foo is now away"}, but what should the type:{} be? Should it be a top-level activity of some kind? Since type:Add, object:type:{away status", etc.} seems kinda overly verbose
15:36:15 [aaronpk]
ajordan: if someone is consuming JSON-LD you can treat it as plain json except for the signatures. if you're producing it then you have to worry more about JSON-LD
15:36:32 [aaronpk]
fr33domlover: okay thank you
15:36:48 [ajordan]
s/producing it/producing data with extensions/
15:37:01 [aaronpk]
fr33domlover: one more question. I was thinking about inbox/outbox for actors
15:37:10 [aaronpk]
... it adds new addresses like actorid/inbox actorid/outbox
15:37:21 [aaronpk]
... that differs from RESTFUL applications where you can get and post the object ID directly
15:37:47 [aaronpk]
... I had this thought, suppose a project is an actor, since a project is part of the application itself, it's not a person, it doesn't need to GET its own outbox or POST to its inbox
15:38:12 [aaronpk]
... so the only things you need from an outbox and inbox for a project is people need to be able to post to an inbox to send changes and get from the outbox to see events
15:38:26 [aaronpk]
... so if I make the inbox the same url as the actor, and the outbox can have a url like actorid/changes
15:38:39 [aaronpk]
... then if I want to make a project into an activitypub actor, I don't need to add a new URL to my application
15:39:01 [aaronpk]
... since the changes are already visible as an HTML page, so I can use the Accept header to return the activitystream
15:39:35 [aaronpk]
... in regular REST applications you post to the object to make changes, so if you use the same URL for the inbox as the actor then you can use the content-type header whether you're receiving plain JSON or HTML form input, it all goes to the same URL
15:39:51 [aaronpk]
... so I was wondering if that's okay, and not surprising to other implementations, that the inbox URL and actor ID are the same
15:40:00 [aaronpk]
ajordan: off-hand, I don't think that should be a problem
15:40:11 [aaronpk]
... this has been discussed recently on IRC with saranix I think?
15:40:50 [aaronpk]
... it is worth noting that in activitypub, the client-to-server stuff is totally separate from server-to-server, so if you wanted to, you could implement a "regular" rest client-to-server API and then use activitypub for server-to-server.
15:41:03 [aaronpk]
... i'd encourage you not to of course, since if you implement activitypub client-to-server you get all the clients
15:41:16 [aaronpk]
fr33domlover: I noticed they're separate, and I agree I want the existing clients to be able to communicate
15:41:29 [aaronpk]
... so I think i'll go for what I said, making the inbox and actor id the same
15:41:46 [aaronpk]
ajordan: sounds great
15:41:57 [aaronpk]
fr33domlover: thanks for the feedback, i'm done asking questions for this meeting
15:42:01 [ajordan]
np
15:42:05 [ajordan]
scribenick: ajordan
15:42:28 [ajordan]
aaronpk: thanks, great questions and I like trying to reuse existing URLs and things like that, sounds great
15:42:44 [ajordan]
... well cool, anyone else have any new topics they want to squeeze in since we have a few extra minutes?
15:42:48 [ajordan]
... I don't see anything on the wiki
15:42:59 [melody]
i think saranix said they wanted to talk about chat on AP
15:43:12 [ajordan]
aaronpk: alright well in that case let's call the meeting early
15:43:27 [saranix]
BUMP: so if someone is "following" the room actor, they will get objects like { summary:"@foo is now away"}, but what should the type:{} be? Should it be a top-level activity of some kind? Since type:Create, object:type:{away status", etc.} seems kinda overly verbose
15:43:40 [ajordan]
aaronpk: well thanks everyone for coming, hope it's been useful and let's do it again in two weeks
15:43:44 [ajordan]
fr33domlover: yes thanks
15:43:59 [ajordan]
aaronpk: and thanks ajordan for scribing
15:44:06 [ajordan]
<ajordan> np! I've been slacking recently lol
15:44:32 [aaronpk]
trackbot is slacking so I think i'm gonna have to generate the minutes manually
15:44:32 [trackbot]
Sorry, aaronpk, I don't understand 'trackbot is slacking so I think i'm gonna have to generate the minutes manually'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
15:44:38 [ajordan]
<ajordan> wait
15:44:43 [ajordan]
<ajordan> saranix is here
15:44:52 [aaronpk]
ohai
15:44:55 [aaronpk]
wait not on the call tho
15:45:05 [saranix]
yeah I don't do mumble
15:45:43 [aaronpk]
someone want to take the question?
15:46:30 [ajordan]
saranix: I would think it would be an Edit on the Actor
15:46:54 [aaronpk]
i'll leave you all to continue this in IRC :)
15:46:59 [saranix]
ajordan: oh yeah, that makes sense
15:47:03 [ajordan]
<ajordan> are we done on Mumble? my laptop is about to die
15:47:14 [saranix]
ajordan: but AP requires Edits send the Full Object... which sucks for chat
15:47:16 [ajordan]
s/saranix: /<ajordan> saranix:/
15:48:16 [ajordan]
scribenick: nobody
15:49:04 [ajordan]
aaronpk: do we want to end the meeting? or what's happening
15:49:16 [ajordan]
also
15:49:18 [ajordan]
present+
15:49:18 [aaronpk]
trackbot, end meeting
15:49:18 [trackbot]
Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
15:49:24 [aaronpk]
I don't know what's wrong with trackbot
15:49:32 [aaronpk]
RRSAgent, end meeting
15:49:32 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'end meeting', aaronpk. Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:49:36 [ajordan]
#sysops?
15:49:36 [aaronpk]
RRSAgent, stop logging
15:49:36 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'stop logging', aaronpk. Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:49:41 [aaronpk]
:sigh:
15:49:48 [ajordan]
RRSAgent, bye
15:49:55 [ajordan]
RRSAgent: make logs public
15:49:55 [aaronpk]
RRSAgent, make minutes public
15:49:55 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', aaronpk. Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:50:15 [ajordan]
should we `bye` RRSAgent?
15:50:19 [aaronpk]
RRSAgent, bye
15:50:19 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items