on master help sign in
Quick update regarding federation.
commit810324cf7ff7278b981f83867f0cda2ee59ef803 authorFang <fang@fang.io> dateFri 14 Apr 2017, 18:36 (10 years ago) parente9b2823
1 file changed+1−2
docs/talk/architecture.md+1−2
docs/talk/architecture.md+1−2
@@ -72,7 +72,6 @@ Now that we know how a broker keeps track of things, we should have an easier ti
7272 $% :: station configuration ::
7373 {$create (trel knot cord posture)} :: create station
7474 {$depict (pair knot cord)} :: change description
75− {$adjust (pair knot posture)} :: change posture
7675 {$delete (pair knot (unit @t))} :: delete + announce
7776 {$permit (trel knot ? (set ship))} :: invite/banish
7877 {$source (trel knot ? (set partner))} :: un/sub p to/from r
@@ -167,7 +166,7 @@ When a message gets added to a story, or a presence or configuration in it gets
167166
168167Non-message reports include both local and remote presences. This is useful in federation, where subscribers are also interested in the presences on related stations.
169168
170−>Federation is, at the time of writing, completely untested. Messages should work fine, but proper configuration and presence propagation has yet to be seen. We'll probably need a `/federate` subscription path to integrate this cleanly into the existing system. It's an entirely new can of worms though.
169+>Federation is, at the time of writing, largely untested. Messages and presences seem to work fine, but configuration sharing isn't in yet. The solution that's currently in try-out development is having a "federator whitelist", and using a special command to signify a ship starts federating, so that users don't have to manually chain sources together.
171170
172171>**Current implementation** also sends remote configurations in the `%cabal` report. This doesn't seem to be useful for anything. In case of federation, you would want all stations to copy each other's configuration.
173172