Post #2156269
2026-05-07 12:55 UTC
@mariusor@metalhead.club @hongminhee@hollo.social yes, it should be a separate ticket.
I don't like your proposal for multiple reasons:
1) It doesn't include addressing, so the upload server doesn't know how to enforce authorization requests. Is the file for followers? Only addressed accounts? The public?
2) What happens if the client doesn't post the `Create` activity?
I think it's better to keep it all in one transaction together.
Replies (1)
-
@mariusor@metalhead.club 2026-05-07 14:33
> 1) It doesn't include addressing, As always it's the Clients that are responsible for addressing, therefore the second step should cover it, if the user/client chooses to perform it. 2) What happens if the client doesn't post the `Create` activity? Whatever the server desires: cleanup after a while, keeping the media, etc. Why do you think it's relevant for the specification itself? ActivityPub, to my reading, is not about how to *store* content, but about how to *distribute* content. So after it was uploaded, it's no longer the concern of the spec, unless operated further through other ActivityPub requests. @evan@cosocial.ca @hongminhee@hollo.social