• mox@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    That could also mean client API-compatible, so Lemmy apps would work with it, which doesn’t address federation.

      • PenguinCoder@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Pong. @mox@lemmy.sdf.org , in sublinks, the federation services are entirely separate from the API of the instance. So much separate, the federation services are written in a programming language called Golang. The API service is written in a programming language called Java.

        One aspect does not require or preclude the other with Sublinks.

        • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Indeed, protocol is independent from implementation language, but that isn’t the question at hand.

          Do you know whether Beehaw will still federate with the lemmyverse (and therefore the rest of us) after moving to Sublinks?

          • PenguinCoder@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            6 months ago

            The current aim of Sublinks is Lemmy parity for V1 release. So yes, I do see Beehaw still federating with Lemmy instances at the on-set.