Talk:Hubzilla
Suggestion for size reduction
Hubzilla is a very complex piece of software with vastly more features than Mastodon. And besides, even the features that both have are a lot different on Hubzilla. That's why this article is so extensive.
Before loads of content end up being cut and shifted to "advanced" articles, my suggestion is to write new articles about certain aspects in which Hubzilla is very similar to Friendica, (streams) and Forte and put that content into these articles. It'd also keep these aspects from being explained four times over.
And generally, I guess the wiki could use an article on conversations and how they generally work.
But the lists with differences should be left untouched.
- You're absolutely right that we should make sure no content is lost. And I guess simply explaining that a bit more in the intro of the article plus writing a paragraph with the basic info for prospect non-techy users would be enough and then the article could remain that long.
- Btw wow, thanks for being so active again. I have actually been thinking of changing the whole structure of the wiki quite a bit (also making sure no content - including translations - are lost) and wrote down my first ideas here: https://joinfediverse.wiki/Join_the_Fediverse:Proposal_for_new_stucture
- I'm right now trying to join the SocialHub forum to discuss this some more. Do you think that's a good place for such discussion?
- --PaulaToThePeople (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're absolutely right that we should make sure no content is lost. And I guess simply explaining that a bit more in the intro of the article plus writing a paragraph with the basic info for prospect non-techy users would be enough and then the article could remain that long.
- I think I might put at least some of the information into its own articles anyway if it's similar in multiple projects and at the same time notably different from Mastodon. That's easier than having four "copies" of it in four articles, especially if someone wants to edit it and only edits one of them. Also, it'd make linking to an article on this particular aspect possible.
- That structure change sounds like a good idea. Having two articles on almost everything, one for beginners, one for the advanced, has been a bit cumbersome anyway, not to mention sometimes twice the maintenance effort.
- As for the SocialHub forum, it has always appeared to me as a forum for only protocol designers and server software devs that's no place for community talk. But the Join the Fediverse Wiki may fall under "off-site documentation", and I guess Fediverse devs can be grateful that the community takes up the task to document their stuff in a language that end users understand. Also, it may be worth the effort trying to get some devs on board to document things that the community simply is unaware of. Maybe I could try and join the SocialHub forum myself.
- --Jupiter Rowland (talk) 09:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Re-write by someone with practical experience with Hubzilla
Both Hubzilla pages read like they were copy-pasted from official material which, in turn, was written by backend devs who only "speak backend dev". They both don't speak a language which a common user could understand.
Suggestion: Since I've been familiar with Hubzilla for years now, up to and including temporarily running my own hub, I could take some time and re-write them.
While doing so, I could create a separate article about the channel concept which Hubzilla has in common with (streams) as well as several now-defunct projects. This article could be linked to from the corresponding pages. That way, it won't have to be explained separately several times. --Jupiter Rowland (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2023 (CEST)