Add More Categories to


Have been thinking about a number of ActivityPub related things lately and realizing I could really use a place to gather some of them and then remembered that this forum existed. I see it seems Funkwhale has been using it the most lately.

I was thinking it would be useful to start some categories for client apps. Not sure what the best organization would be but I have been following the development of pretty much all of the iOS and Android apps and think it would be nice to have a place to discus them in comparison to one another. Also some of them might benefit from having their own category and have the app devs get in here too.

Was thinking of starting a megathread with screenshots of the same fediverse post loaded into as many iOS and Android apps as I can to show off what the UX differences are.

Any suggestions on the idea of adding more categories here to Socialhub would be much appreciated.


So far we decided to add three new categories (see New Category about projects willing to implement AP) - does those sounds sufficient?


Do we want to use this forum as a place where implementers could discuss about the protocol itself? Then we would need a fitting category for this.


this is what I was looking speaking with the AP team, and I ended up here! :wink:



I was thinking it would be useful to start some categories for client apps.

That’s a great idea. I started a client watchlist but I haven’t had much time to work on it, so far it’s just a short list of Mastodon apps:

It would be great if you could fill in some of the blanks from your research. I don’t think there’s a client page on yet, but I think it would be really helpful.

I was also thinking it would be good to have a board for folks working on meta-resources to help the fediverse grow, instance monitoring sites like and visualization sites like The issues tracker has been informally used for some interaction between folks doing different kinds of fediverse meta-resources, but they will be much more discoverable here and it will keep our tracker tidier :wink:

Any suggestions for what to name such a category?


Edited to further the proposal…

Would it be useful to have:

Proposal to reorganize existing categories

This proposal is to balance the categories in a way that:

  • facilitates further cooperation beyond coding
  • takes into account the reality of off-Discourse per-project communication facilities
  • integrates existing efforts to promote the Fediverse


Covering technical questions about the protocol, standardization, and implementation.


Focusing on the server to server protocol


Focusing on the client to server protocol


Focusing on discovery of instances, monitoring, analysis, overview and promotion of the Fediverse.

E.g., each site (,…) could use a category where a discussion would be attached to publications, effectively providing AP community comment capability to all Fediverse actors.


Focusing on actual ActivityPub implementations (e.g., the founding software here holding a top level category, would be moving to second level category under #software).
We would use hashtags to differentiate libraries, media types, server and client apps…

Since most projects have their own online communication channels, this category would be more interested in providing an easy entry point for existing and new software implementations to potential contributors. It can be used to give an overview of where the action is happening for a specific implementation of the ActivityPub standard. When Discourse can federate with AP, these categories will be able to reflect projects announcements published elsewhere.


Maybe fediverse would be a good name for services and software monitoring the fediverse.

The following issue might be a good start for contents to put in that new category:


hey everyone, developer of here! it’d be nice to chat with other people working on tools to understand the fediverse — glad to have found this thread (thanks @how!)

another tool that springs to mind is!


@tao since nobody seems to object, should I proceed and create the #fediverse category and put you in charge?



since nobody seems to object, should I proceed and create the #fediverse category and put [@tao] in charge?

Sounds good to me. I’ll help out as best I can but I intend to be offline as much as possible over the summer months :wink:


sure! though maybe the name “fediverse” is a bit too general? maybe something like “fediverse-stats”?

i’m planning to start my summer fediverse work in about a week’s time, so i’m happy to keep
up with this category.


I made a separate topic but Packaging, Distribution, Hosting, etc. category/section is most definitely related to this thread. Just linking it in here as well.


I proceeded with a re-organization of categories:

  1. software implementation categories moved under #software: subcategories were turned into tags
  2. #lounge was removed (it’s a default category reserved to people with trust level >= 3)
  3. there’s a remaining point: should we consolidate #fediversity to also cover community meetings (e.g., move #activitypub:prepare-fosdem-2019 and #fediconf there), @tao?