On 12/08/2009 06:41 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
The UI presentation can be worked out... my main worry is that this
just doesn't do what I'd expect "forwarding" to do.
Let's judge the implementation by the design criteria, though. The
goal isn't to make "forwarding" work, but to clone Twitter's retweet
functionality. Maybe 'repost' would be a better name than 'forward'?
'Redistribute'?
My kinda inclination is a "share" button which can provide multiple
(extensible) options:
"Share with friends on identi.ca" (new-retweet style)
"Repost to [X] identi.ca [ ] Twitter [ ] Facebook" (which I
would think looks more like a traditional retweet)
"Copy/paste link" (I'm not sure how obvious it is to folks that the
timestamp is a permalink)
But if we want to stick with one button in the near term, I'd say either
"share" or stick with "forward" if we've got no consensus on changing
it. I'd rather we have the feature for compatibility even if we're not
sure how to best present it yet... newer clients like the latest Tweetie
2 update are using Twitter's retweet API and it errors out on us if we
don't implement it.
It looks like we've got a major problem with our mainstream methods
of reading, though, because notices you've gotten via forwarding
appear in the timeline according to their original posting date, not
when they were forwarded:
That was a bug in the implementation. It only happened when you didn't
have memcached enabled; it works the same now, with or without.
Yay!
It also looks like they create a distinct status ID for each retweet.
This would be problematic for us; we'd either need to let these
reposts show up in the public stream (and other public places, like
search results, tag streams, and groups) or filter them out. Both are
problematic!
Hmm, not impossible -- I believe we're already filtering gateway'd
notices like the Twitter import bridge from public timelines. (Need to
double-check on search.) Having multiple notice ids is certainly the
easiest way for us to handle pushing the reposts to other services on
our infrastructure.
Should the same notice show up twice, if you've already received it?
Once for the original post, and once for the first repost? Or should
it show up once for every repost, even if there are hundreds?
There's legitimate differences of opinion out there; too many repeated
notices can be annoying, but if you don't watch your feed like a hawk
you might not see the original. I've seen several people explicitly
comment that they *want* to see the repeats so they're more likely to
see something important/interesting.
I always hate to say "make it an option" but I think that's what Twitter
did/is doing on that issue. :)
-- brion
_______________________________________________
StatusNet-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.status.net/mailman/listinfo/statusnet-dev
