https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/9436237

@MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de
(replaced with my own user profile, as I’m not trying to fill other users’ inboxes for no real reason)(also, this somehow worked right when making this post, but not the original comment)
[@MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de](/u/MachineFab812)
https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/9293054 https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/9620373 https://jlai.lu/comment/6487794

While we’re at it, am I missing at instance-agnostic method for linking posts as well?

  • MachineFab812OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Why should I have to download an app to impliment an obvious feature that should just work in the web-UI? Lemmy is still in active developement, and there is no good reason to treat it like an immutable legacy code-base that should require external scripts and hacks in order to present and interact with properly.

    My original version/thought?

    If the comments/posts were just numbered relative to their communities instead of generated by each instance, there wouldn’t have to be this disconnect at all.
    /c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/18177167
    Would be THE instance-agnostic link for that post, and
    /c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/9620373
    THE instance-agnostic link for that comment.

    We’re already using the LINK button on whichever post/comment to copy this stuff to our clipboards, so its not like there should be some massive concern over making people type too much. Url-shortening is also an option, but half the shortenned url’s I deal with any more are dead links - the page/original url isn’t gone, but the shortened version has been expired.

    We wouldn’t even have to redo how the instances generate content numbers for posts/comments generated locally, but set them to pull such numbers in for each post/comment mirrored from another instance. Not even slightly hard to come up with, though I don’t have my laptop with me so I’ll refrain from speaking on the difficulty of implimentation versus all the “legacy-numbered” content already out there.

    … seems like it would be easier to impliment without breaking most existing links versus UUIDs, BUT UUIDs are more of a standard, and either method would probably be best implimented with a server-side(or page-embedded and executed client-side) method for translating legacy links to the new version.

    • bleepbloopbop [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Why so hostile? I don’t see you contributing.

      Anyhow, other users have provided context on where discussions are taking place on how to improve the issues you brought up. It’s not a static legacy codebase, but nor do ideas spring to life without dev effort.

      • MachineFab812OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Am OP. Presented one solution and lauded another. Meanwhile, you’ve poo-poo-ed both of those and suggested only an app or extention will do, while highlighting that the existing apps both already have the problem solved and aren’t necessarilly feature-complete versus the severs.

        Your inability to pick a narrative or achnowlege the statements of others reeks of insincerity, and now you’re claiming I am not contributing to this thread I’ve started. Get lost.

        • bleepbloopbop [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Nope. I highlighted the app only because it’s an existing, working solution that an individual can use today. It is not a great solution for obvious reasons. I for one only browse via lemmy-ui, so that app does precisely nothing for me. My intention wasn’t to poo-poo possible solutions, but to push back on your entitled framing implying that it was such an easy problem that it must have been an intentional omission to leave it out. Other users had no problem conversing with me in good faith and not being so hostile. I agree it’s an issue, and so do the Lemmy devs, it just hasn’t been solved yet.

          I don’t care about your contribution to the thread, I mean you aren’t contributing to Lemmy, the codebase, and so my patience for such a level of hostility and complaining is low.

          • MachineFab812OP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            You assume I’m not contributing … based on what? I addressed participation in this thread first as that’s the most convenient for me to substantiate. I’ve bought many of the clients, before trying them and finding I preferred the webUI, but I went into this more in my conversation here with @MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz … Regardless, I’ve stuck to the topic, except for where called out for “hostility”, “entitlement”, or “not contributing”. You went there first, and seem to have benefitted from the fact that my reply ended up on the wrong one of your (dismissive and condescending from the start)comments.

            I don’t need your patience. This is not your post. Should have left you blocked, but blocking you obscured @RobotToaster@mander.xyz 's far more valid, one word, contribution to the topic at hand.

            • bleepbloopbop [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              You assume I’m not contributing … based on what?

              Based on the fact I haven’t seen your handle contribute to the github, which I follow relatively closely. Not to mention from your question’s phrasing, and lack of research beforehand, I could have surmised as much. A contributor probably would have been able to find the relevant discussion on the github and read it rather than just badmouthing the software in a post.

              I agree, RobotToaster thought through their reply and came with ideas that might actually work, at least in their second comment, not just complaining “why isn’t this already the way I want it??”

              • MachineFab812OP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Thing is, I know enough to come in here and ask “why not UUIDs?”, but instead I asked, yes, not far from the way you said it, but “why is it this way? Am I the crazy one here?” (the implication of “I think this is crazy and no one else does”, as sanity is generally defined by society or group concensus)

                Funny story, I’m not crazy in this respect, this time, and the fix is already in the lower-level codebase even though the webUI hasn’t yet implimented it, or so I’m told, something that was more-or-less apparent from seeing it working basically the same across multiple clients.

                It’s a little hard to contribute code from inside a moving(LOUDLY) steel box miles away from civilization, and I would have done some more research were I in a place to do so(contribute code, I mean, you know, best practices and all), but the idea that I would use this handle on github for non-machining related code is laughable, although you are correct on the specific criteria that I have contributed no code there whatsoever. I am well aware that I am more valuable here(not there, for now) as a shit-stirrer with a wallet, and see no reason to come at others with bUt dO YoU CoDe!?